What rules have I broken? There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing a ratio of two logarithmic values.SailorSaturn13 wrote:Physics change. Rules stay. 100 Years ago, physical books considered impossible to blow up a whole town with a single bomb. Or to fly outside Earth's atmosphere.
But even then, no one really working in acoustics assumed that one third of 60 dB is 20 bD - it is 55 dB (or 50, depending on scale). Never had. Never will, if he wants to make his work correctly. Such meaning is simply nonexistant in science or engineering.
What you think a moron wouldn't or would do is your own opinion. I've shown how the scale can work.SailorSaturn13 wrote:So ration of powers is expressed in linear decibels, not in decibel/decibel fraction.
And no one but complete moron would do otherwise, for many reasons, some of them stated before.
Therefore, even if logarithmic scale were used in SW, they STILL would understand a fraction of power as a shift in scale - and not as fraction in scale.
They talked about a ratio of power levels which you continualy assume were given out at linear scale. Something for which you presented no evidence other than a lot of screaming, bolding and underlining your claims.SailorSaturn wrote:I assumed he spoke about POWER, not scale number. No one refers to a third of scale number as a third of power, UNLESS the scale is linear and those two things fall together.
You've got it backwards. You need to prove 1/3 was given in linear scale before you can make any claims based on it. Secondly nothing in canon states some kind of chain reaction was involved.SailorSaturn13 wrote:Prove it. And no you cannot use planet's reaction to do so. That planet reacts linear to shots is never stated in book, it's an unjustified assumption by you. Canon supercedes physics, which means postulating a new entity is always better than disregarding canon.
You just cannot comprehend what I am telling you can you? 10W is not one third of 1000W but 10W IS one third of 1000W on a logarithmic scale.SailorSaturn13 wrote:Mathematically - 1/3. But NO ONE SANE will claiim that 10W is a third of 1000W just because of that. And no one sane will claim 10 dB POWER is 1/3 of 30 dB POWER. Note, btw that dB is dimensionsless, while power is not!
There is only one meaning of "one third of power" - and it is the one I gave before: three thirds combined make the whole power. And if you say "a third of number in arbitrary logarithmic scale", than this is simply not one third of power, as stated in the canon!
Everybody? You have some evidence to back that up? Including Imperial engineers?SailorSaturn13 wrote:And when speaking about power, everybody (who works in field) wants to "go back to linear values"
Apparently yes.SailorSaturn13 wrote:You postulate a sudden and unmentioned increase of recharge rate of 13 magnitude orders?
The recharge for second shot went for a hour although it could be done in less than microsecond?
Actually as far as I can see only a handful of people on this board insist that Death Star destroys planets via some fancy chain reaction so your accusation that "only Warsies" interpret evidence as I are incorrect.SailorSaturn13 wrote:On the contrary: canon supercedes physics. Disregarding canon statement (and understanding it in a way no one but Warsies do IS disregarding) is much, much worse than changing universe physics.
Generally the physics in universe is at the merci of author, he wants planets easily exploding - they are. He wants them reacting nonlinear to some sorts of energy - they are. In SW there are also canon issues - physics given by lower canon is superceded by higher - by that's irrelevant here.
Words are also defined by author - and we, the readers , cannot understand them like we want. Each word has to be understood in its normal meaning. If there are two, OK - bet in this case there aren't. Not to mention that it is billion times more probably that physic laws will change than that people actually buildingsomething big like DS1 will resort to such formulas to define "one third". And no we do not introduce exotic reaction - we just transfer it from reactor to the planets, which fits canon much better.
Again nowhere do you provide evidence linear scale was used, you claim you don't add any exotic reaction you just "transfer the reaction to the planet" which obviously means that you do in fact introduce another unknown reaction to the planet as well as the one within the reactor that creates the beam. And somehow you believe this is simpler than saying they were using logarithmic scale.
Never did I redefine the word third merely asked for evidence they were comparing linear values. Evidence you haven't shown instead relying on strawmaning my argument.Jedi Master Spock wrote:They say absolutely nothing about it in general. Once in a while, one might comment on the practical impossibility of blowing up a planet.
However, what you're doing is something that the textbooks intentionally and directly discourage, in order to justify conclusions that were highly questionable in the first place. Trying to redefine the meaning of the word "third" simply does not work.
There is nothing complex about the conversion formula I have given. Secondly something is not erroneous just because you disagree with it. And honestly "logarithmic grinder". It's a very simple function and it is completely defined unlike your "exotic" reaction which you yourself said needs no defense. Finally I'm not interested in your self proclaimed mind reading capabilities when it comes to Motti and the rest of Imperial officers.Mr. Oragahn wrote:KS, you believe that most people would use a scale that measures in log of a complex function representing the maximum power of the superlaser.
The simple mistake you make is that with a logarithmic scale, 1/3 of the superlaser power is a purely erroneous formulation, as it would be 1/3 of the log of the superlaser power.
The most clever way to speak of Despayre shots would have been to say a millionth or a billionth of the final power, or x points on scale "alphazeta som'thing".
The very fact that you have to bring it through the logarithmic grinder literaly defeats your argument.
I'm tired of your spin. Look, even Motti didn't give a rat's ass about saying it was just 30 percent of the DSFP (just borrowing S13's unit), instead of coming with the proper fraction.
They were going in for a quick estimation, one you don't have to break your mind into pieces and working it through translations of logarithmics functions not even properly applied to be understood (yes, as S13 largely points it, your use of the fraction is wrong).
Point being, you're completely spinning the meaning of a mere fraction into completely meaningless distorted babble based on an irrelevant exercise in mathematics.
Define "roughly similar". You completely ignored my point that even several orders of magnitude difference could still result in effects which fit the description in the novels.Mr. Oragahn wrote:We know that the 1/3 + 1/3 and the direct 2/3 have roughly similar effects. The difference can be explained by the fact that one weapon delivers the energy all at once, while the second does it over more than one hour and a quarter, with two shots separated by one hour and fifteen minutes.
You are welcome to provide evidence that only the atmosphere expands.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Not the crust of the crescent. The atmosphere expands, that's all.
What is this thing where you get angry if I don't accept your baseless assumptions? Yes it's blue. Superheated objects are blue. At a frame rate of 24/s it is easily possible that at one moment you'll see a bluish planet and in the next the planet is blue because it's matter is superheated. Try to understand that you claimed this is EVIDENCE for the supposed chain reaction so go ahead and prove it.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Geez. It is blue, because it's the fucking planet's atmosphere for crissake. If you watched the whole sequence, you'd notice that this blue doesn't grow out of the explosion, as if it was as hot as a blue star. No, this blue region is already there.
If you can't get that from the very picture you post, it's sad.
Besides, all other zones don't show any blue while they become superheated. It is not because some parts become super heated that they would automatically turn blue either.
Again, my point was not about claiming there were no parts of the planet being thrown into space. My point was that the other side of the planet didn't have its crust inflate and moved upwards.
Your take is completely irrelevant unless you can offer a description of the mechanism and evidence.Mr. Oragahn wrote:My take on it was about the threshold caused by the saturation of the superlaser into an unique target. Call that CR or not, it's not important.
How is what you like in any way relevant? Why would every single detail need to be described in the book? So they didn't mention the crater so what? Secondly how exactly do you expect to drill all the way to the core without producing an enormous crater?Mr. Oragahn wrote:Way to miss the point.
Can you care to actually read what people say?
It is most bizarre, as long as you ponder the lack of description about a super crater, massive ejecta or else, while there's enough energy dumped into the planet to cause massive earthquakes all across the planet.
That's why I liked the idea of the beam drilling the crust and depositing energy within the planet.
It cannot be unclear since it is explicitly stated mathematical formula with all operators (log,=,+,^) mathematically defined. Secondly it isn't wrong since it correctly converts values from log to lin scale.Mr. Oragahn wrote:It explains nothing because it's very unclear and wrong even on the simple use of words and units.
Quote and page number for AOTC:ICS please. Again you simply restate your claim that hypermatter reactors aren't capable of the outputs claimed by the ICS even though novel explicitly states that hyperreactor provides the superluminal boost. You can't pretend that it doesn't exist all you wish it won't go away. Secondly your accusation that "I can't stand the downscaling of power" could just as easily be turned on you. With much greater justification I might add since you mention AOTC:ICS hypermatter rector where it suits you yet continue to claim it's output figures are wrong. A hallmark of dishonesty. By the way could you provide the actual quote in question?Mr. Oragahn wrote:No, because the reaction in the reactor occurs in real space, and is a real space reaction. Hypermatter is even said as being constrained to real space (AOTC:ICS -- ouch).
Basically, the DS novel says it's still hypermatter, but the reactors aren't capable of the outputs claimed in the ICS.
You'll, of course, notice that with the output being capped as such, with the superlaser definitively made exotic in its higher outputs, and with the diameter of the station upped to 160 km instead of 120 km, any downscaling of energy density to the size of a core of an ISD will lead to much lower figures than the recent nonsensical stuff we got served with.
Oh yes, I'm sure you see the connection and that's why you can't stand it.
The same one whose output figures you reject in the same breath? By all means provide quotes and understand acceptance of hypermatter operation description and simultaneous rejection of power generation figure is nothing less than dishonesty.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Because of the reason I typed two paragraphs above. Read AOTC:ICS.
You have established nothing other than claiming accelerating planetary mass faster than light is somehow less energy intense. The same goes for your baseless claims that "hyperland" will somehow "help" the planet get destroyed instead of being the other way around: you need energy to go to "hyperland".Mr. Oragahn wrote:Oh but the evidence thus far has clearly established that the output is capped, and alone can't reach planet busting levels without a very major help from hyperland.
The quote stats jump to hyperspace. Any additional travel time is neither considered nor included in the quote.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Ha, again, that one. It never gets old, doesn't it huh?
It may have never occured to Wong, nor you, that nowhere it implies that the energy figure mentionned is before the jump.
You do realize that it would be most stupid to generate star level of power just to make a microjump, right?
You also do realize that Star Wars' EU officially has trips that last weeks, if not more, and that any consumption relevant to travel is also relative to time and distance of said trip.
Of course, this totally flies above your head, because it's so much easier to get a fix of wank by swallowing completely nonsensical interpretation that disregards even most logical ways to measure total consumption.
Then you have no point.Mr. Oragahn wrote:No, that's not "in other words", because you clearly don't get the simple point of it. Call the extra gain of energy a question of CR or not, it's not a big problem, because again, my point is not to claim how it exactly happen.
Concession accepted.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Obviously.Kane Starkiller wrote:Thus the chain reaction is only defined by it's proponents insistence that it somehow lowers Death Stars energy requirement.
That is Han's opinion. His opinions on Imperial military capabilities have shown to be unreliable.Mr. Oragahn wrote:There's nothing new. You can read many topics about the Death Star, I always considered, fundamentally, that it was both DET and exotic (for the extra energy).
It rather fits well with other bits of EU, notably how Han in Vector Prime thought only the Death Star could completely vapourize a 20 km wide rocknall.
That's because you've provided no evidence whatsoever.Mr. Oragahn wrote:You're conveniently missing the fact that I consider the book itself dispelling the idea that the reactor can produce planet busting levels of energy on its own. This has nothing to do with the fact that it could be right or wrong. It's just that you can't even see the evidence (from my point) I rely on to formulate the theory.
Ah so we have "one exotic" effect and "another exotic" effects. And this is what "proves" Death Star is not "pure DET"? As I said you have absolutely nothing but your fantasies.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Yes, I know. That's why I said the superluminal boost was another exotic effect.
They don't make any sense to you perhaps. The most superheated matter will be expelled the highest even into vaccum where it will coll down much faster than the superheated matter still in the atmosphere. Thus it could appear from distance after some time as if there is a dark spot over where superlaser hit. In any case you yourself offered no alternative explanation what it is or how is it caused. You are predictably claiming that any unexplaind phenomenon somehow supports your "theory" which you don't even have.Mr. Oragahn wrote:That's lots of babble to evade the problem. Could you explain just simply why, while the superlaser would hit the surface and even heat up the atmosphere to some extent before hand, there'd be so much cool enough matter expelled ahead of the fireball, and why it would be dense enough to mask the much greater amount of super heated matter, and why that cooler matter supposedly sitting above wouldn't actually spread over the surface of the planet, instead of just rising vertically into the sky as you claim?
If anything, the cooler matter would be expelled sideways, with any superheated matter going up, only to be preceded by a nearby atmosphere already on fire.
Your claims don't make any sense.