Phaser NDF theory

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
Goper
Redshirt
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 9:01 am

Phaser NDF theory

Post by Goper » Thu Dec 31, 2015 10:10 am

Hi! I just joined today, so please inform me if any part of my post is not in accordance with the forum rules.

So, it appears that it is rather widely accepted that phasers, along with other similar weapons in the Star Trek universe have some kind of NDF component. This has not been explicitly stated in canon, but appears to jive well with the observed effects of phasers.

Another part of the argument also states that phasers would be much weaker against shielded targets, due to the fact that a major component of a phaser beam's damage, the NDF, would be largely ineffective against shields, leaving only the insignificant DET portion of the phaser beam.

However, throughout the Star Trek, phasers are often used against shielded targets, along with torpedoes (which have so far been accepted to be purely DET weapons). If phasers were as ineffective against shields as the theory might suggest, it would be rather illogical to use them at all.

On the other hand, another possible way to interpret the NDF theory would be to say that phasers have a DET component that is significant when compared to that of torpedoes, but that the damage inflicted by phasers is orders of magnitude greater than that of torpedoes against unshielded targets. This interpretation is often used to explain how the Romulan-Cardassian fleet could expect to destroy significant percentages of a planet's volume within a few hours in TDiC, while using weapons that are popularly interpreted to have yields in the megaton to single-digit gigaton range.

However, within that episode, it is seen that the fleet fired torpedoes, in addition to energy weapons. If torpedoes inflict vastly less damage against most unshielded targets than the energy weaponry used by the major factions in Star Trek, it would be illogical to waste them on an unshielded target, especially since torpedo stocks are rather limited.

Hence, I would like to propose that the energy weaponry used by the major factions in Star Trek effectively deal damage that is within one to two orders of magnitude of the damage done by their torpedoes regardless of the actual damage mechanism, in most situations that starships are expected encounter.

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Mike DiCenso » Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:22 pm

Actually, we don't know canonically that phasers have a nuclear disruption force (NDF). We just know that on certain settings, phasers can disintegrate people and objects. What the mechanism is behind that remains a mystery and it is one of the major features about phasers that set them completely apart from the similar-looking phase modulated weapons of the 22nd century. We also know that you can use this effect (destroying a target) within about 1.5 to 2 meters from someone and they won't be harmed, although someone standing right next to an object or another person being disintegrated will cause severe injury or be fatal as seen in TOS' "The Omega Glory" when Spock is working on a computer that Captain Tracy shoots with his phaser causing Spock to be thrown backwards and suffer life-threatening injuries as a result.

As for the direct energy transfer (DET) component, phasers have shown many times in the TOS and TNG-eras with settings that cause effects and damage very consistent with what we would expect to see from such a weapon, and very powerful to boot at times. In fact, although we have few statements on phaser output, we do have enough to get an idea that the "DET component" is quite powerful. The aforementioned torpedo evidence is one, but episodes like TNG's "The Mind's Eye" and "A Matter of Time" establish that a rifle can output 1.02 megwatts routinely for nearly a minute's firing time and the second largest phaser array on the Enterprise-D's phaser output variance had to be controlled to the nth degree within 60 gigawatts or very bad things would happen indicate high energy and power output. We also know from Star Trek: Enterprise that phase cannons can manage 500 gigajoules and those were considered low-yield weapons by the Klingon and Vulcan standards. The kicker comes in the third season two parter "In a Mirror, Darkly", when we see the Constitution-class USS Defiant use phasers to tear apart ships known to have shields capable of resisting almost indefinitely phase cannon fire and photonic torpedoes of the NX-class starships. So that means phasers in the 23rd century must be at least an order of magnitude or more higher than 500 gigajoule phase cannons on NX.
-Mike

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by 2046 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 8:56 am

The NDF argument as it relates to shipboard phasers is a sort of idealized notion that makes good rational sense provided you largely ignore the source material.

In a perfect world, this would have all been worked out in advance in the 60's, and at no point would phasers have been used against shielded starships. However, they were, and continued to be the whole time, so the idealized version of events was nullified before it got started.

Goper
Redshirt
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 9:01 am

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Goper » Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:04 am

I don't really agree with the NDF theory either, due to the presence of conflicting evidence. However, this theory, along with the associated implications appears to be regarded to be true by many posters on some other forums, so I was attempting to postulate that whether phasers (and other similar forms of energy weaponry) rely on the NDF to deal damage or not isn't really relevant in most situations.

User avatar
Moff Tarquin
Bridge Officer
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Moff Tarquin » Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:17 am

Lucky's started a couple of threads "recently" regarding the composition of a phaser beam. He has proven with quotes that Federation phasers have an electromagnetic component in addition to the "rapid nadion" component, and that they can be used to fire nano-probes. He also has argued (rather less successfully) that they have a plasma component. In any case, if they have an EM component, then they have a DET component. Simple as that.

It would make sense for a phaser beam to have multiple components, given the wide array of effects that they appear to be capable of producing - ranging from simple "heat ray" functions to the bizarre disintegration effect that confuses all of us. The synergistic interactions of the components (including, but not limited to, rapid nadions, electromagnetic radiation, and microscopic particulates) could result in exceptionally divergent effects depending on a) the total amount of energy the phaser is directing at the target, and b) the ratios of the components present in the beam.

Interestingly, many of the effects of a phaser can be replicated by a simple laser weapon.

Most of my information comes from a website called Atomic Rockets.

Links to the pages relevant to phaser function:
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/r ... energy.php
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/r ... exotic.php

WARNING: READING THE ATOMIC ROCKETS WEBSITE MAY REVEAL THAT YOUR FAVORITE SCIENCE FICTION FRANCHISE IS ABOUT AS SCIENTIFICALLY SOUND AS THE HARRY POTTER SERIES. I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF SCIENCE FICTION THAT SUCH A REVELATION MAY CAUSE YOU. WEBSITE OWNER WINCHELL CHUNG IS RESPONSIBLE, BUT DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

The following quote comes from the second link:
But the real Swiss army knife of the energy weapon world is the Star Trek Phaser. It had all sorts of interesting settings, including "blow up like a grenade" er, ah, "forced chamber explosion."

In the original Star Trek, phasers had settings for Stun, Heat, Disrupt, Dematerialize, and Overload. In Star Trek phase II, the settings were Stun, Kill, Heat, Disintegrate and Overload.

Stun would render a living humanoid being unconscious by lighting up their nervous system like a christmas tree. Kill shorts out the nervous system of a humanoid being permanently. Heat would raise the temperature of objects, it was commonly used on wilderness planets to heat up a rock as a substitute for a campfire. Disrupt/Disintegrate "breaks down cohesion", I guess this means it causes the object to fall apart into gravel or turn into vapor. Dematerialize turns the target into energy, presumably something like neutrinos; otherwise the energy release would obliterate everything within several kilometers of ground zero. And overload turns the phaser into a hand grenade with the pin pulled, not surprising considering how much energy is in the phaser's power pack.

We can duplicate some of this with a laser. Stun would be a laser in Pulsed Energy Projectile mode. Kill would be a laser in Pulsed Impulsive Kill Laser mode. Heat would be a laser in unpulsed heat ray mode at relatively low energy levels. Disrupt would be a laser in pulsed blaster mode or in unpulsed heat ray mode at high energy levels. Overload makes the battery explode. Dematerialize is the only one that cannot be done, but it is rather silly in the first place.

("Dematerialize" is a fancy way of saying "disintegrator ray". A weapon that can vaporize a human body without setting the walls and floor on fire or even raising the temperature of the room? Give me a break!)

Remember that a laser in pulse mode could have its effect optimized to a given material by a specific setting for pulse frequency. So one could have a "metal cutting" setting for use as a tool or to open a locked door, and a "kill human" setting for war-to-the-knife combat. All with the same pulse laser, just with a different frequency.

Such a weapon would have a selector switch for each mode. And it might have a "customizable" mode. This would allow an expert to manually tweak the settings: continuous or pulse, spectrum frequency, pulse timing, power level, etc.
Be sure to click through all the links. There's some good stuff there. All in all, it seems reasonable to think that (for hand phasers at least, and for most settings) electromagnetic radiation is the primary component in a hand-phaser's beam.

As he points out, however, the "vaporize" setting is what throws a major wrench in the works for any "phaser = laser" theory. Obviously, this is where we need the nadions. While nadions are obviously technobabble, it might be possible to shoehorn the data from the shows into a model that looks sort-of/kind-of reasonable if you squint at it right.

My "headcanon" for nadions is pretty simple: first of all, when they go through matter in a solid or liquid state, they have crazy dispersion. This explains why the "glow" of a "vaporized" object spreads through the entire object. Secondly, when a nadion collides with an atomic nucleus, one of the collision products remains in the nucleus, and catalyzes a proton-decay-like process. Only with two important differences: 1) it's neutron-decay, and 2) instead of positrons and gamma rays, almost all decay products are neutrinos (and anti-neutrinos). So a carbon nucleus could end up decaying into two alpha particles, two protons, and a butt-load of neutrinos. This explains the mysterious disappearance of a vaporized object - and the possibility of irradiation if you stand too close to a vaporized object. (funny prediction from my model: if you inhaled the vapor from a vaporized object, the pitch of your voice would jump a couple of octaves - because the most common decay products would be hydrogen and helium)

I think that my headcanon is superior to most chain-reaction models of nadions, because it explains why we occasionally see vaporization of only a part of an object - there were only enough nadions to collide with that many atoms.

In the end, I think that EM and nadion components would be capable of mutually accounting for the majority of phaser effects. A high power, short laser pulse would create a small amount of plasma, possibly enough to knock down the target, or even induce a seizure - which would be sufficient for a stun setting. An even higher power pulse could be capable of completely overloading a nervous system, and a low flux of nadions would generate enough alpha particles to thoroughly irradiate the target - resulting in a kill. A constant beam of electromagnetic radiation would be an effective heat ray, and a train of highly focused high-power pulses would result in penetrative or even explosive effects. Finally, a high flux of nadions would cause a target to disappear in a puff of alpha particles.

An interesting result of this model is that the matter of the target is not used to produce any of the destructive effects - everything comes straight from the phaser's barrel.

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:47 am

Plasma is such a random term though, introducing more problems than solutions, but helps to give some substance to the beams, whereas lasers would just be boring to look at from any angle other than straight ahead of the cannon. :)
Now, would another component guide both photons and whatever plasma stated gas is used...
The decay into neutrinos is quite an easy solution to most cases of convenient matter disappearance. The rate of interaction of neutrinos is so low that you'd need to vape entire city blocks to start feeling a tingle.

User avatar
Moff Tarquin
Bridge Officer
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Moff Tarquin » Sun Jan 10, 2016 2:20 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Plasma is such a random term though, introducing more problems than solutions, but helps to give some substance to the beams, whereas lasers would just be boring to look at from any angle other than straight ahead of the cannon. :)
The problem with plasma in general is that it will bloom very quickly. A weapon that just shot plasma down its barrel would basically have a continuous explosion coming out of its muzzle. Pretty damn cool looking, but at the same time, extremely limited range and extremely dangerous to the user. In RL, the latter two considerations would outweigh the coolness factor.

The problem with plasma as a component in Federation phasers in particular is that we have no direct canon evidence for it - or, at least, none that I know of.

Though, from a narratological perspective, I can totally understand what you're saying. Real lasers, no matter how high powered and deadly, would look boring, and probably wouldn't sound any cooler than a camera.
Now, would another component guide both photons and whatever plasma stated gas is used...
The photons wouldn't need too much guidance. The lenses or mirrors in the laser emitter should be enough unless you're talking about such a large range that diffraction becomes a major issue.

The plasma, being essentially the glowing stuff in fireballs, on the other hand, badly needs a containing component. But if you have something that can cage a moving explosion, why waste energy on the plasma? Just shoot the cage!

In the case of Trek, we definitely have force-field generators that are up to the task of holding plasma, but most of them look too large to fit into a hand phaser.

As for whether nadions would need containment, your guess is as good as mine.

All in all, it seems possible for a miniaturized force-field generator, analogous to a deflector beam, to make up a portion of a phaser's output. If plasma can be shown to be a component of a phaser's output, that possibility becomes a necessity. However, the most that I feel comfortable saying about a plasma component is that it would explain why the beam glows.

Goper
Redshirt
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 9:01 am

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Goper » Sun Jan 10, 2016 5:24 am

Thanks Moff Tarquin for the interesting read. The warning wasn't really necessary though, as I've felt for some time that there's no way to explain some of the things occurring in star trek if you don't take space magic into consideration :p. I have certainly not thought so deeply about the actual mechanism of phasers as I subconsciously took that as another example of space magic, so it's interesting to see how their effects can be rationalised with current science.

I remember one of the producers of DS9 saying that if they had portrayed ground weapons as they were supposed to be in-universe, the combatants shouldn't be able to stand within visual range of each other. Though this statement is not canon, I think it gives a rather good idea of the kind of effects that the writers intended star trek hand-held weapons to cause (as in, they cause a lot of collateral damage).

I personally think that it is plausible to have a forcefield within a phaser, as I believe that Worf was able to convert a tricorder into a personal forcefield generator in rather short order. This shows that it is possible to create relatively powerful forcefields with small devices. I'm not suggesting that the plasma theory is either correct or wrong, but I would just like to point it out.

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Mon Jan 11, 2016 9:47 pm

Moff Tarquin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Plasma is such a random term though, introducing more problems than solutions, but helps to give some substance to the beams, whereas lasers would just be boring to look at from any angle other than straight ahead of the cannon. :)
The problem with plasma in general is that it will bloom very quickly. A weapon that just shot plasma down its barrel would basically have a continuous explosion coming out of its muzzle. Pretty damn cool looking, but at the same time, extremely limited range and extremely dangerous to the user. In RL, the latter two considerations would outweigh the coolness factor.

The problem with plasma as a component in Federation phasers in particular is that we have no direct canon evidence for it - or, at least, none that I know of.

Though, from a narratological perspective, I can totally understand what you're saying. Real lasers, no matter how high powered and deadly, would look boring, and probably wouldn't sound any cooler than a camera.
Precisely. Unless being constrained within some coherent magnetic field, perhaps leading to a torus, or at least cascading down a guidance path that's previously charged, we'd be dealing with a dangerous flamethrower. The ejecta speed would need to be boosted magnetically for minimizing the literal risks of backfire.
In the end, we'd be seeing a very geyserish and dense column of fire pushed at mad speeds out of the barrel, with tons of recoil included.

Now, the contained genre that matters so much in science fiction might exploit the mechanism that's behind lightning balls, and it's very possible that it involves a relatively solid core. So a plasma weapon firing pulses might be using hybridized projectiles.

This idea could be pushed, through science fiction, with the projectile literally casting whatever necessary field to maintain the plasma sheet around itself. Leading to what's been a rather well known projectile in SW, the proton torpedo. Proton, for well, you guess it, ionized stuff. Same goes for concussion missiles.
Old and outdated model. I digress, but apparently, the new SW policy had these projectiles retroactively defined as totally particle-made. Yup.
Now, would another component guide both photons and whatever plasma stated gas is used...
The photons wouldn't need too much guidance. The lenses or mirrors in the laser emitter should be enough unless you're talking about such a large range that diffraction becomes a major issue.
So much time spent dealing with fancy weapons and concepts of photons and plasma being mixed, photons made to twirl within projectiles (leading in the extreme to the convoluted Saxtonian model for turbolasers) results in such odd comments.
Feels like a complete reboot.
The plasma, being essentially the glowing stuff in fireballs, on the other hand, badly needs a containing component. But if you have something that can cage a moving explosion, why waste energy on the plasma? Just shoot the cage!

In the case of Trek, we definitely have force-field generators that are up to the task of holding plasma, but most of them look too large to fit into a hand phaser.
Unless... you manage to imbue a very specific property to the plasma so it traps itself. it becomes its own stable structure. Now that's totally made up and stuff of SF, but I suppose that we might infer two concentric layers which are so well balanced that they attract each other and produce a perhaps even hollow projectile, a balloon that can stretch but doesn't pop, unless it hits something. Maybe an empty torus or else.

As for whether nadions would need containment, your guess is as good as mine.

All in all, it seems possible for a miniaturized force-field generator, analogous to a deflector beam, to make up a portion of a phaser's output. If plasma can be shown to be a component of a phaser's output, that possibility becomes a necessity. However, the most that I feel comfortable saying about a plasma component is that it would explain why the beam glows.
Or it might be a very specific kind of particle decay that does release photons.
Like, just randomly, absolutely tiny quantities of antimatter?

User avatar
Moff Tarquin
Bridge Officer
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:51 pm

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Moff Tarquin » Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:48 am

Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Moff Tarquin wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:Plasma is such a random term though, introducing more problems than solutions, but helps to give some substance to the beams, whereas lasers would just be boring to look at from any angle other than straight ahead of the cannon. :)
The problem with plasma in general is that it will bloom very quickly. A weapon that just shot plasma down its barrel would basically have a continuous explosion coming out of its muzzle. Pretty damn cool looking, but at the same time, extremely limited range and extremely dangerous to the user. In RL, the latter two considerations would outweigh the coolness factor.

The problem with plasma as a component in Federation phasers in particular is that we have no direct canon evidence for it - or, at least, none that I know of.

Though, from a narratological perspective, I can totally understand what you're saying. Real lasers, no matter how high powered and deadly, would look boring, and probably wouldn't sound any cooler than a camera.
Precisely. Unless being constrained within some coherent magnetic field, perhaps leading to a torus, or at least cascading down a guidance path that's previously charged, we'd be dealing with a dangerous flamethrower. The ejecta speed would need to be boosted magnetically for minimizing the literal risks of backfire.
In the end, we'd be seeing a very geyserish and dense column of fire pushed at mad speeds out of the barrel, with tons of recoil included.
That's more or less how plasma weapons work in my favorite sci-fi webcomic: Scholck Mercenary.
Now, the contained genre that matters so much in science fiction might exploit the mechanism that's behind lightning balls, and it's very possible that it involves a relatively solid core. So a plasma weapon firing pulses might be using hybridized projectiles.
Even when the bottle is outside the plasma, containing any kind of high-energy plasma in a magnetic bottle is kind of like trying to contain a big blob of gelatin with nothing but rubber bands. One can only imagine how much more difficult it would be to get a ball of plasma to make its own bottle!

In atmosphere, things might be easier, especially if you can ionize a channel of air with a laser or something first. That or take the ball-lightning approach.

I don't particularly like the idea of a projectile in the middle of a plasma weapon - why not just make your starship's armor out of whatever that projectile was made of?
This idea could be pushed, through science fiction, with the projectile literally casting whatever necessary field to maintain the plasma sheet around itself. Leading to what's been a rather well known projectile in SW, the proton torpedo. Proton, for well, you guess it, ionized stuff. Same goes for concussion missiles.
Old and outdated model. I digress, but apparently, the new SW policy had these projectiles retroactively defined as totally particle-made. Yup.
What?? Why?!
Now, would another component guide both photons and whatever plasma stated gas is used...
The photons wouldn't need too much guidance. The lenses or mirrors in the laser emitter should be enough unless you're talking about such a large range that diffraction becomes a major issue.
So much time spent dealing with fancy weapons and concepts of photons and plasma being mixed, photons made to twirl within projectiles (leading in the extreme to the convoluted Saxtonian model for turbolasers) results in such odd comments.
Feels like a complete reboot.
That's really bizarre. I never understood how a "twirling photons" view could ever be taken seriously.

Is there a link to a discussion of the Saxtonian model?
The plasma, being essentially the glowing stuff in fireballs, on the other hand, badly needs a containing component. But if you have something that can cage a moving explosion, why waste energy on the plasma? Just shoot the cage!

In the case of Trek, we definitely have force-field generators that are up to the task of holding plasma, but most of them look too large to fit into a hand phaser.
Unless... you manage to imbue a very specific property to the plasma so it traps itself. it becomes its own stable structure. Now that's totally made up and stuff of SF, but I suppose that we might infer two concentric layers which are so well balanced that they attract each other and produce a perhaps even hollow projectile, a balloon that can stretch but doesn't pop, unless it hits something. Maybe an empty torus or else.
Ball-lightning style containment fields might work well in-atmosphere, but without ambient air-pressure to help the magnetic fields along, I don't see such any plausible mid-future technology that could provide a basis for such a projectile. That's not to say that it's impossible, just that it requires black-box-tech (or, as other people like to call it, handwavium) - eg, a force-field "jacket" of some kind. I also dislike the idea that the plasma itself would be generating such a force field - plasma is just too homogeneous, anything more advanced than a magnetic field would need a generator with multiple stable, differentiated parts in order to work.

That's not to say that even "black box tech" would be incapable of generating a plasma projectile. To the contrary, I'm thinking a sort of a deflector beam pulse traveling along with the plasma would fit the ticket quite nicely. Any damage the weapon does is a synergistic combination of the force beam and the plasma it's holding in place.
As for whether nadions would need containment, your guess is as good as mine.

All in all, it seems possible for a miniaturized force-field generator, analogous to a deflector beam, to make up a portion of a phaser's output. If plasma can be shown to be a component of a phaser's output, that possibility becomes a necessity. However, the most that I feel comfortable saying about a plasma component is that it would explain why the beam glows.
Or it might be a very specific kind of particle decay that does release photons.
Like, just randomly, absolutely tiny quantities of antimatter?[/quote]
Meh, it'd be so much easier just to say that nadions can decay into photons if they don't collide with anything. Occam's razor and all that.

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by 359 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:44 am

Precisely. Unless being constrained within some coherent magnetic field, perhaps leading to a torus, or at least cascading down a guidance path that's previously charged, we'd be dealing with a dangerous flamethrower. The ejecta speed would need to be boosted magnetically for minimizing the literal risks of backfire.
In the end, we'd be seeing a very geyserish and dense column of fire pushed at mad speeds out of the barrel, with tons of recoil included.
That's more or less how plasma weapons work in my favorite sci-fi webcomic: Scholck Mercenary.
If you're not willing to shell your own position, you're not willing to win.

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:09 pm

As for the proton torpedo... I'm certain it was posted on the databank right before the flush. We mention it elsewhere on this board, but I cannot remember where.

Darth Spock
Bridge Officer
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: A Beta Quadrant far far away

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Darth Spock » Mon Feb 01, 2016 5:15 am

Goper wrote: Another part of the argument also states that phasers would be much weaker against shielded targets, due to the fact that a major component of a phaser beam's damage, the NDF, would be largely ineffective against shields, leaving only the insignificant DET portion of the phaser beam.

....

However, throughout the Star Trek, phasers are often used against shielded targets, along with torpedoes (which have so far been accepted to be purely DET weapons). If phasers were as ineffective against shields as the theory might suggest, it would be rather illogical to use them at all.
One quick thought I'd like to add on this point is that a major assumption is that Star Trek shields are pure energy. If part of the shield bubble actually consists of a particulate matter, NDF could still enjoy a significant damage bonus against shielded targets, in addition to the DET component of the weapon.

Aside from meshing well with NDF beams being effective against shields, it fits well with the very specific percentage tracking of shield strength, the use of gravitons in shield systems, and the ability of a ship to completely restore its shields by shutting them down briefly, then reactivating them, as the Equinox did in the Voyager episode of the same name, while simply diverting more power to shields during combat in other situations is generally of minimal effectiveness, and never rebuilds lost shield capacity.

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

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by Mike DiCenso » Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:34 pm

The biggest problem with that is that there is no evidence that I am aware of that would even begin to suggest such a thing. Why have matter in the shield and thus allow a phaser or disruptor to do even more damage to it than if it was pure energy. However we know that shields are not simple energy, but graviton-based as seen in several Okudagram readouts, and they have been stated and shown to have frequency. We also know you can make them really powerful by dumping all or most of warp and or impulse power into them. They can be drained, which suggests they are charged up, and as shown in VOY's "Equinox, Part I", they can be recharged on the fly by shutting them down for a time.

But that's really about it in summary.
-Mike

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Phaser NDF theory

Post by 359 » Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:45 pm

Darth Spock wrote:it fits well with the very specific percentage tracking of shield strength
The percentage doesn't seem to represent the shield "health" per say, but more it's current effectiveness. Hence some weapons striking the shields but it is stated that the shields are "holding." Clearly the shields used some energy in protecting the ship, so why doesn't their rating change? That'd be because the fire did not reduce the shield's ability to offer protection. It also explains how the ships take greater damage as the shields fall in percentage. The shields are no longer offering total protection from damage.

Post Reply