Warp-combat superiority

[Praeothmin]

Translation: my logical explanation flew over your head like planes over gophers, and so you trampled it into the mud like pearls before swine.

Since you've failed to prove they're different when challenged, you forfeit.

In other words:
You can't prove it, and so your assumption is baseless and worthless...
Got it... :)

[KSW]

Translation: my logical explanation flew over your head like planes over gophers, and so you trampled it into the mud like pearls before swine.

Since you've failed to prove they're different when challenged, you forfeit.

In other words:
You can't prove it, and so your assumption is baseless and worthless...
Got it... :)

Sure I can prove that phasers move faster than ships in hyperspace, it's not even a question.

You're the one who can't prove it's different from hitting a star, other than quibbling over irrelevancies like "gravitons vs. nadions" when we KNOW that Starfleet uses BOTH.
When you dodge around the point like that, you've clearly lost the argument.

[Khas]

Sure I can prove that phasers move faster than ships in hyperspace, it's not even a question.

Well then, Prove it! Show us where you got the info to form this theory.

[KSW]

Sure I can prove that phasers move faster than ships in hyperspace, it's not even a question.

Well then, Prove it! Show us where you got the info to form this theory.

I already have-- in this thread. It's bad netiquette to issue challenges that have already been addressed, so stop trolling; it shows that you have the audacity to flip off new questiosn without even having the decency to read what they've already answered.

Can't get much ruder than that.

[Khas]

What sources did you provide? Oh that's right, NONE. All you provided was fan speculation. And some pretty wild speculation at that.

[KSW]

That's more than you've got.
There's not much crazier than claiming that starships travel faster than their own phasers!
There's null hypothesis, and there's insanity.

[Khas]

Except for the little fact that we've never seen a ship that was travelling at sublight speeds fire on one that was going at warp. And it's been said, when a ship is travelling at warp, it doesn't actually move. Space-time around the ship is distorted at FTL speeds, while the ship effectively stands still, carried by the warp bubble.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Warp_drive

[KSW]

We've seen ships at warp fire on ships at sublight, so they'd have to be moving faster.

According to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, the EM energy beam of a phaser can be delivered at warp speeds due to an annular confinement beam jacket and other advances in subspace technology. These are stated to be new inventions in the late 24th century, (page 84) however we have seen them used at warp-speeds in the 23rd so it's simply a refinement of an earlier technique.

[Khas]

That's different. A ship at warp has a much better chance of firing on one that's not than one that's not firing on one that is.

Technical Manuals are non-canon.

[KSW]

That's different. A ship at warp has a much better chance of firing on one that's not than one that's not firing on one that is.

Er, you seem naive to the laws of relative motion; in fact it's easier to hit a ship at warp because it's "stretched" relative to a stationary one via Lorentzian reversal.
The only advantage of a moving ship is that it can change course in ways that the stationary one can't predict.
As Sulu says in Elaan of Troyus, the Enterprise just can't respond fast enough on impulse-power; then when they get warp-drive working, they don't go to warp, they simply pivot.

Evidently by the 24th century there was no more advantage in warp-combat due to advances in ship-response systems, so you'd be wasting power by going to warp instead of powering your weapons and shields.

Overall you're just being absurd; if ships can move hundreds or thousands of times lightspeed, then a lightspeed-weapon would be just plain ridiculous.
In "Balance of Terror" the Romulan plasma-weapon moves faster than Warp 9, while in comparison the Enterprise phasers move much faster.

[Khas]

What I meant was that a ship at warp has a better chance of getting a weapons lock on one that's not than one that's not at warp has of getting one on one that is. The only way a ship at sublight speeds could hit one at warp is if they just started firing phasers off in every direction at random, and hoped that one crossed the path of the warp-ship at the right time, or they know where the ship at warp is going, and fire the phasers in the way of the ship at warp at the right time.

But seeing as warp drive takes goes on in realspace, and hyperspace is another dimension, the point about whether or not a phaser beam could hit a ship in hyperspace is moot. It can't.

[KSW]

What I meant was that a ship at warp has a better chance of getting a weapons lock on one that's not than one that's not at warp has of getting one on one that is. The only way a ship at sublight speeds could hit one at warp is if they just started firing phasers off in every direction at random, and hoped that one crossed the path of the warp-ship at the right time, or they know where the ship at warp is going, and fire the phasers in the way of the ship at warp at the right time.

But seeing as warp drive takes goes on in realspace, and hyperspace is another dimension, the point about whether or not a phaser beam could hit a ship in hyperspace is moot. It can't.

Er, I think you're in over your head on this one. ST sensors can track ships at any speed, and subspace in Trek exists alongside realspace.
In Journey to Babel, Kirk tries to hit the Orion ship even though it's moving about Warp 10; the ship was changing course too fast for phaser-lock (as it existed in the 23rd century), but it shows they can do it against ships moving at warp.
And hyperspace is not "another dimension" ala another universe, I've already explained all this and I'm not going to repeat myself for your audacity.

Next you'll say that the Romulan plasma-weapon couldn't move faster than warp 9, even though it was gaining on the Enterprise which was moving that speed.
If your enemy had a weapon that was more powerful than yours and moved 1000x faster, you'd be toast in any universe.

[Khas]

There's a difference between simply tracking and getting a weapons lock.

I never said hyperspace was part of another universe. While hyperspace is a higher dimension, it's still part of "our" universe, much like how String-theory claims that our own universe has 11 dimensions.

And you haven't proven a single Goddamn thing in this thread.

[KSW]

There's a difference between simply tracking and getting a weapons lock.

What part of "relative motion" do you not understand?
They had a weapons-lock on the Orion-ship in Journey to Babel, it was simply changing course too fast. The only difference from the Enterprise, is that the Orion ship knew what it was going to do, so it could hit the Enterprise-- but not vice-versa.
Meanwhile you're implying that Kirk was stupid for even trying to hit the Orion ship from sublight speed. It was simply using an unknown power-system which rendered it too fast to hit.

I never said hyperspace was part of another universe. While hyperspace is a higher dimension, it's still part of "our" universe, much like how String-theory claims that our own universe has 11 dimensions.

Sure, and stars extend into all 11 of them more than ordinary matter, so as to destroy a ship that flies through them.
NOT. (I also see you don't know what "ala" means.)
Again, there's a difference between reading something and understanding it, so you're in over your head... again.

And you haven't proven a single Goddamn thing in this thread.

There's also a difference between proving something and convincing a pathological contrarian layman.
Done with you.

[Khas]

There's a difference between simply tracking and getting a weapons lock.

What part of "relative motion" do you not understand?
They had a weapons-lock on the Orion-ship in Journey to Babel, it was simply changing course too fast.

That was when both ships were at warp. Not when one was at warp and the other wasn't.

I never said hyperspace was part of another universe. While hyperspace is a higher dimension, it's still part of "our" universe, much like how String-theory claims that our own universe has 11 dimensions.

Sure, and stars extend into all 11 of them so as to destroy a ship that flies through them.
NOT. (I also see you don't know what "ala" means.)
Again, there's a difference between reading something and understanding it, so you're in over your head... again.

It's not the stars themselves, jackass. It's the distortion of space-time brought on by their gravitational fields, simply extended into a higher dimension.

And you haven't proven a single Goddamn thing in this thread.

There's also a difference between proving something and convincing a fool.
Done with you.

[/quote]
You haven't provided a single piece of evidence saying that hyperspace and subspace are one and the same, while everyone else has provided evidence saying they aren't. You haven't provided anything. Is your ego really so massive that you think that you can just pull claims out of your ass and expect everyone to take them as canon Word-Of-God statements?