A way ST forces could win a battle with the Empire

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Re: the battle of Coruscant that involved the Invisible Hand had been going on for several hours before Skywalker and Kenobi's intervention, during which the ship had been shot up to the point that the deflector shields were failing.

[Lord Revan]

a hard disruptor

should read "a hand disruptor".

[Jm81]

And you are clearly missing the point that anti-matter pulses or streams would cause massive annihilation explosions whenever the beam or pulse connected with unshielded matter, and we never see that happen when disruptors are used. This is painfully obvious in the case of hand-disruptors, in which the beam typically travels through air before reaching its target without causing an explosion the instant the particles leave the weapon's "barrel".

http://www.scifights.net/SciFights.net/Star_Trek.html
Antimatter video time stamp 6:40 - 7:08
The Romulan war bird only fired one weapon, its is described as a romulan disruptor and you there can see the resulting explosion from the a/m matter annihilation explosion when the pulse connected with the unshielded matter of the freighter.

[Jm81]

to put a scale to what Ted C said your average human has the mass of roughly 50-80kg depending on build and height. Now remeber that E=MC2 and the square of lightspeed is a damn big number. Also remeber that mere 3kg of matter and anti-matter causes a 64Mt blast at 100% effiency.

now since we know that disruptors like phasers don't leave vapor behind when someone is shot with vaporazition setting if disruptors are AM weapons they must totally annihilate the body, now here comes the important part, the energy from a typical human would be 2-3 Gigatons that's more they any weapon in ST has been show to be able to generate under normal conditions and you're telling me that a hard disruptor could cause that and not even burn the carpet?! Since the expected secondary effects are NOT present therefore disruptors cannot be AM weapons (unless you want to argue that hand disruptors work of totally different princibles in which case prove (and no that line from Riker cannot be used for that)).

I never contended that hand disruptors are A/M for the very reasons you post. As it would be as silly as saying Turbolasers are lasers.

[Jm81]

Re: the battle of Coruscant that involved the Invisible Hand had been going on for several hours before Skywalker and Kenobi's intervention, during which the ship had been shot up to the point that the deflector shields were failing.

Citation?

[Batman]

http://www.scifights.net/SciFights.net/Star_Trek.html
Antimatter video time stamp 6:40 - 7:08
The Romulan war bird only fired one weapon, its is described as a romulan disruptor and you there can see the resulting explosion from the a/m matter annihilation explosion when the pulse connected with the unshielded matter of the freighter.

Explosion does not automatically mean antimatter. It just means explosion. Phasers cause those all the time. Also, if ship disruptors are antimatter weapons, how come they didn't cause explosions the moment they hit the Founder Homeworld's atmosphere, but only triggered a reaction once they hit the ground, where they created effects completely incompatible with an antimatter weapon you complete and utter moron?

[Jm81]

Explosion does not automatically mean antimatter. It just means explosion. Phasers cause those all the time. Also, if ship disruptors are antimatter weapons, how come they didn't cause explosions the moment they hit the Founder Homeworld's atmosphere, but only triggered a reaction once they hit the ground, where they created effects completely incompatible with an antimatter weapon you complete and utter moron?

You tend to lose context of my replies to other people that aren't you. Ted C asked a simple question. If Romulan disruptors are a/m where is there an example of a huge explosion. That was one from the very same episode in question.

As to your second question, who says they only triggered a reaction once they hit the ground? How do you know there wasn't a reaction going on through the atmosphere? Let me also remind you that there is a lot more mass per unit volume in the solid/liquid surface vs gas atmosphere for the a/m to react with.

[Batman]

Explosion does not automatically mean antimatter. It just means explosion. Phasers cause those all the time. Also, if ship disruptors are antimatter weapons, how come they didn't cause explosions the moment they hit the Founder Homeworld's atmosphere, but only triggered a reaction once they hit the ground, where they created effects completely incompatible with an antimatter weapon you complete and utter moron?

You tend to lose context of my replies to other people that aren't you. Ted C asked a simple question. If Romulan disruptors are a/m where is there an example of a huge explosion. That was one from the very same episode in question.

Ship disruptors either ARE AM or they are NOT, and not only is them causing a huge explosion NOT evidence for them being AM, it's merely evidence for them causing a huge explosion, especially when that explosion happens noticeable fractions of a second after the actual disruptor hit indicating it triggered something on the ship going kablooee and leaves behind sufficient debris for Data to analyze and find something wrong with the dispersement pattern.

As to your second question, who says they only triggered a reaction once they hit the ground? How do you know there wasn't a reaction going on through the atmosphere? Let me also remind you that there is a lot more mass per unit volume in the solid/liquid surface vs gas atmosphere for the a/m to react with.

The visuals say so. Or rather, they say no interaction was going on. Either the Romulans weren't firing antimatter period, they were doing so but in laughably small amounts which would make ship disruptors the next best thing to useless as a weapon, or the visuals were part of the Founder's misdirection.

[Jm81]

Ship disruptors either ARE AM or they are NOT, and not only is them causing a huge explosion NOT evidence for them being AM, it's merely evidence for them causing a huge explosion, especially when that explosion happens noticeable fractions of a second after the actual disruptor hit indicating it triggered something on the ship going kablooee and leaves behind sufficient debris for Data to analyze and find something wrong with the dispersement pattern.

I'll repeat myself because you didn't get it the first time...

You tend to lose context of my replies to other people that aren't you. Ted C asked a simple question. If Romulan disruptors are a/m where is there an example of a huge explosion. That was one from the very same episode in question.

Ship disruptors either ARE AM or they are NOT, and not only is them causing a huge explosion NOT evidence for them being AM, it's merely evidence for them causing a huge explosion, especially when that explosion happens noticeable fractions of a second after the actual disruptor hit indicating it triggered something on the ship going kablooee and leaves behind sufficient debris for Data to analyze and find something wrong with the dispersement pattern.

Still trying to detract from the point of the thread eh? Regardless if you and I come to some sort of agreement or not about disruptors being a/m, which we wont, I have still established two facts with video canon evidence:

1. SW shields can be flown through by small craft at slow speeds.
http://www.scifights.net/starwarsshields2.mov
Time stamp 10:28 - 10:39 Un-shielded droid tri-fighters attack a shielded capital ship with intent to knock out its shields.
Time stamp 10:43 Capital ship's regional port side deflector shields are down

2. Anti-matter particle streams have been used by the ST powers.
http://www.tubeplus.me/player/1339201/S ... _Blood/%22
Time stamp= 35:55
Time stamp= 43:58

Thus utilizing this technology, star trek powers can win battles against the Empire.

[Batman]

Ship disruptors either ARE AM or they are NOT, and not only is them causing a huge explosion NOT evidence for them being AM, it's merely evidence for them causing a huge explosion, especially when that explosion happens noticeable fractions of a second after the actual disruptor hit indicating it triggered something on the ship going kablooee and leaves behind sufficient debris for Data to analyze and find something wrong with the dispersement pattern.

I'll repeat myself because you didn't get it the first time...

You tend to lose context of my replies to other people that aren't you. Ted C asked a simple question. If Romulan disruptors are a/m where is there an example of a huge explosion. That was one from the very same episode in question.

One of us didn't get it. That one wasn't me. This video clip doesn't prove disruptors are AM weapons, it merely proves that a disruptor hit managed to make the freighter blow up.

Ship disruptors either ARE AM or they are NOT, and not only is them causing a huge explosion NOT evidence for them being AM, it's merely evidence for them causing a huge explosion, especially when that explosion happens noticeable fractions of a second after the actual disruptor hit indicating it triggered something on the ship going kablooee and leaves behind sufficient debris for Data to analyze and find something wrong with the dispersement pattern.

Still trying to detract from the point of the thread eh?

No, still hacking away at your wall of ignorance regarding the nature of disruptors.

1. SW shields can be flown through by small craft at slow speeds.
http://www.scifights.net/starwarsshields2.mov
Time stamp 10:28 - 10:39 Un-shielded droid tri-fighters attack a shielded capital ship with intent to knock out its shields.
Time stamp 10:43 Capital ship's regional port side deflector shields are down

*Yawn*. Clone Wars era, Wars level ships. Show something like this happening to Imperial era vessels.

2. Anti-matter particle streams have been used by the ST powers.

No kidding. It's totally not like I mentioned photorps in this thread. Repeatedly. WE KNOW THEY HAVE ANTIMATTER WEAPONS YOU MORON!

[Jm81]

No kidding. It's totally not like I mentioned photorps in this thread. Repeatedly. WE KNOW THEY HAVE ANTIMATTER WEAPONS YOU MORON!

Photon torps aren't anti-matter weapons. They are anti-matter/matter weapons. Something very different than what I am establishing precedent for. When the torpedo provides the mass along with the a/m to fuel a reaction it has the advantage of being effective against shields. And here is the key distinction, a pure a/m weapon doesn't rely on wattage of output from the energy generated. Rather, while the energy helps, it mainly relies on annihilating the armor so the energy it generates doesn't need to be used in the form of work to destroy the armor and get to the vulnerable decks below.

And this is why photon torpedoes didn't establish the precedent I needed.

[Jm81]

*Yawn*. Clone Wars era, Wars level ships. Show something like this happening to Imperial era vessels.

*Yawn* Same old tired reply. Canon from TCW is still canon until contradicted by canon later on to show tech level improvement. And honestly, can you really point to anything in Return of the Jedi that is some obvious advancement in technology like we see from TOS to TNG? Heck, even the deathstar technology had been developed during the clone wars.

[Captain Seafort]

And honestly, can you really point to anything in Return of the Jedi that is some obvious advancement in technology

We have an explicit statement from Ackbar that if capships knock out the ISDs' shields then rebel fighters might stand a chance a chance against them. This directly contradicts the notion that the serious damage inflicted on the Ex could have been achieved without such capship support.

[Ted C]

I never contended that hand disruptors are A/M for the very reasons you post. As it would be as silly as saying Turbolasers are lasers.

And what is your justification for the inherent claim that hand disruptors operate on wildly different principles from starship disruptors? This isn't a matter of a trying to make a science fiction term conform to a modern definition: this is you trying to claim that the same made-up term is used in two entirely different ways in one show.

[Lord Revan]

I never contended that hand disruptors are A/M for the very reasons you post. As it would be as silly as saying Turbolasers are lasers.

And what is your justification for the inherent claim that hand disruptors operate on wildly different principles from starship disruptors? This isn't a matter of a trying to make a science fiction term conform to a modern definition: this is you trying to claim that the same made-up term is used in two entirely different ways in one show.

you won't get any justification, if you noticed I asked for that already and he ignored it.

to put a scale to what Ted C said your average human has the mass of roughly 50-80kg depending on build and height. Now remeber that E=MC2 and the square of lightspeed is a damn big number. Also remeber that mere 3kg of matter and anti-matter causes a 64Mt blast at 100% effiency.

now since we know that disruptors like phasers don't leave vapor behind when someone is shot with vaporazition setting if disruptors are AM weapons they must totally annihilate the body, now here comes the important part, the energy from a typical human would be 2-3 Gigatons that's more they any weapon in ST has been show to be able to generate under normal conditions and you're telling me that a hand disruptor could cause that and not even burn the carpet?! Since the expected secondary effects are NOT present therefore disruptors cannot be AM weapons (unless you want to argue that hand disruptors work of totally different princibles in which case prove it (and no that line from Riker cannot be used for that)).

here's my post with added emphasis and fixing of few typos

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Re: the battle of Coruscant that involved the Invisible Hand had been going on for several hours before Skywalker and Kenobi's intervention, during which the ship had been shot up to the point that the deflector shields were failing.

Citation?

Wookieepedia

Unable to escape Coruscant, the Invisible Hand had sustained heavy damage from the guns of Republic Star Destroyers over the course of a full day of battle. A screen of Separatist battleships, destroyers, and frigates sheltered the flagship from further harm, but after hours of sustained fighting,the craft's deflector shields were failing.

Revenge of the Sith Novelisation. Point is the main shields weren't an issue for Anakin and Kenobi, only the hangar ones.

[Batman]

No kidding. It's totally not like I mentioned photorps in this thread. Repeatedly. WE KNOW THEY HAVE ANTIMATTER WEAPONS YOU MORON!

Photon torps aren't anti-matter weapons. They are anti-matter/matter weapons.

So are antimatter weapons, you blithering idiot. The whole point of antimatter weapons is the matter/antimatter interaction. While harping on the stupidity of Trek characters is well practiced here and well deserved most of the time, even if it weren't for the fact that antimatter weapons go back all the way to TOS, I think everybody here would agree that yeah, since they figured out M/AM makes for a nice energy production ratio, maybe throwing AM at matter if you somehow manage to get around the shield or there aren't any would have occurred to them.

Something very different than what I am establishing precedent for.

Let's see. AM weapon-throw AM at matter. Photon torpedo-throw AM at matter, only you prepackaged the matter. Not exactly seeing the spectacular difference?

When the torpedo provides the mass along with the a/m to fuel a reaction it has the advantage of being effective against shields. And here is the key distinction, a pure a/m weapon doesn't rely on wattage of output from the energy generated. Rather, while the energy helps, it mainly relies on annihilating the armor so the energy it generates doesn't need to be used in the form of work to destroy the armor and get to the vulnerable decks below.
And this is why photon torpedoes didn't establish the precedent I needed.

Yeah. I mean photon torpedoes totally rely on the wattage output from the energy generated, rather than the...M/AM reaction of the warhead that works on the exact same principle as a pure AM weapon hitting an unshielded hull?

And why the hell would you need to establish a precedent? Pretty much everybody here already knows Trek has AM weapons.

[Lord Revan]

I think he assumes that "pure" AM weapons would ignore the yield needs and take out small or mid level SW warships with essentially one hit just like the disruptors on the Duras' sisters BoP (yes techinically a Klingon ship but a) Duras' sisters got weapons and equipment from the Romulans b) IIRC Klingon gave disruptor technology to the romulans during TOS as part of a tech trade during their alliance) took out the ENT-D with just one blast from it's wing disruptors, oh wait it didn't the Enterprise took several disruptor and torpedo hits (we can't really tell how many due to the cuts inside the ship) on bare hull and didn't blow up until after the battle damage caused the warp core to go critical and those shots were from a bird of prey which being a raider/gunboat probably has weapons stronger then it's size sugggests kind of like the federation Defiant class.

Another thing to consider if hand disruptors and ship board disruptors work on totally different princibles on a basic level why call them by the same name, I mean in RL we call field guns, howizers and mortars by different names even though their basic working princible is essentially the same (lob an explosive shell at the target), it would get even more confusing since UFP calls klingon weapons by same name as well. Even I know that in combat situations the more things you need to remember or keep track of more likely you are to make (fatal) mistake.

[Batman]

Well, technically, they could. All they have to do is get a ludicrous amount of antimatter through the shields somehow. And not care about dying in the resulting explosion.

[Jm81]

And honestly, can you really point to anything in Return of the Jedi that is some obvious advancement in technology

We have an explicit statement from Ackbar that if capships knock out the ISDs' shields then rebel fighters might stand a chance a chance against them. This directly contradicts the notion that the serious damage inflicted on the Ex could have been achieved without such capship support.

http://www.movie2k.to/Star-Wars-Episode ... 93268.html
Timestamp 1:53:51 - 1:54:05
Ackbar: "We got to get those fighters more time, concentrate all fire on that super star destroyer."

No comment about about knocking out a ships shields... were you just making stuff up or do I have the wrong timestamp???

[Jm81]

I never contended that hand disruptors are A/M for the very reasons you post. As it would be as silly as saying Turbolasers are lasers.

And what is your justification for the inherent claim that hand disruptors operate on wildly different principles from starship disruptors? This isn't a matter of a trying to make a science fiction term conform to a modern definition: this is you trying to claim that the same made-up term is used in two entirely different ways in one show.

The simple fact that I don't assume beyond what canon evidence states and I try to use an occum's razor approach to this stuff. Data said anti-protons are detected, Riker immediately states that is from Romulan disruptor fire. Hence Romulan disruptor fire utilizes a/m. No such comments are made for the hand held disruptors. Now I could invent some explanation like disruptors are some wild exotic weapon that creates antiprotons as a biproduct but I have seen no canon evidence to support this suddenly newly created weapon type by posters here.

[Jm81]

So are antimatter weapons, you blithering idiot. The whole point of antimatter weapons is the matter/antimatter interaction. While harping on the stupidity of Trek characters is well practiced here and well deserved most of the time, even if it weren't for the fact that antimatter weapons go back all the way to TOS, I think everybody here would agree that yeah, since they figured out M/AM makes for a nice energy production ratio, maybe throwing AM at matter if you somehow manage to get around the shield or there aren't any would have occurred to them.


Let's see. AM weapon-throw AM at matter. Photon torpedo-throw AM at matter, only you prepackaged the matter. Not exactly seeing the spectacular difference?

No. There is a huge difference. pure a/m weapons rely on the target to be the source of matter allowing them to gain one advantage. That is the matter-a/m annihilation as well as the energy created damage the target. While mixed matter-a/m weapons for go the annihilation but gain the advantage of not needing to rely on the target to provide the matter thus massless barriers like shields aren't immune.

Yeah. I mean photon torpedoes totally rely on the wattage output from the energy generated, rather than the...M/AM reaction of the warhead that works on the exact same principle as a pure AM weapon hitting an unshielded hull?

And why the hell would you need to establish a precedent? Pretty much everybody here already knows Trek has AM weapons.

Same principle with very big differences. M/AM weapons do rely on the energy produced of the reaction to damage the target while pure a/m weapons rely on energy produced AND the annihilation itself as a source of damage to the target. Lastly, the need to provide canon evidence for something most would blindly agree with is to lay down a firm foundation of common ground for people of different points of view to start from least we end up talking past each other.

[Jm81]

I think he assumes that "pure" AM weapons would ignore the yield needs and take out small or mid level SW warships with essentially one hit...

No I don't see this as some super weapon that will one shot star destroyers...

[Jm81]

Well, technically, they could. All they have to do is get a ludicrous amount of antimatter through the shields somehow. And not care about dying in the resulting explosion.

This here is the conversation we should be having.

The key to relying on annihilation of m/am reactions is that the rate of matter annihilated equals the mass flow rate being projected. If you keep the stream very thin you can go much deeper into the enemy ship causing damage to soft targets below the armored surface.

As for the survival of the ship crew? Highly doubtful. ST forces may want to invest into using some simple automation for this...

[Captain Seafort]

No comment about about knocking out a ships shields... were you just making stuff up or do I have the wrong timestamp???

RoJ paperback, p178.