l33telboi wrote:I have to point out though, that with this being sci-fi, it's quite plausible that we're talking about science violating matter that releases more energy then E=Mc^2 allows for. But, for me personally, this is very interesting because I've seen so many people harp on about conservation of energy and how it can't be breached that this will force them to make a double-standard. And if Iâ€™m in that debate, Iâ€™ll be more then happy to point it out.
This is a very good point, but one I'd prefer to amend a little.
Case in point: we have more than one example in Star Trek of antimatter behaving in non-antimatter ways: weird wastes, continent-scale blasts from less than an ounce of the stuff, extreme power from wee reactor cores in seeming violation of e=mc^2, et cetera, and that's just the direct stuff.
Faced with the contradictions, some subscribe to the idea that the oft-referenced "dilithium matrix" (or, more generally, dilithium) is to blame for these oddities. As an extra variable in the equation, this makes sense *from a sci-fi analysis perspective*.
This is a significant point of logical departure between certain analytical groups. Faced with warp and hyperdrive, planet-destroying space stations, visible lasers, and so on ad infinitum (ad nauseum, ad absurdum), one group is willing to go that little bit further.
The other group clings to 20th Century physics and cries foul . . . not at warp, hyperdrive, planet-destroying space stations, and so on, but at the concept of hypothesizing that an unexplained variable can be allowed to explain yet another violation of 20th Century physics.
But of course, they do the exact same thing (and turn a blind eye to it on other occasions . . . anyone ever heard of any withering attacks against "Heisenberg compensators"?). When faced with any number of physics violations in the form of the Death Star, for instance, all forms of handwavium are on the table.
It's weird, but there it is.
So is it possible that baradium . . . like so many wonky Trek "elements" and "molecules", is somehow capable of far more than e=mc^2 would indicate? Yes. But you can't just assume that without cause . . . there needs to be evidence.
Oragahn has provided some evidence for this in reference to baradium's use in seismic charges, which are wacky as all hell, technologically speaking.
That having been said, though, it seems likely that 21 gigatons would ruin a Star Destroyer's day, based on Lucas-canon estimates. So I see no particular cause for an argument from consistency, excepting when one feels it necessary to try to keep consistent with later admitted inflations
of EU firepower and energy usage claims.