Wong Collision Corrections

[Setesh]

Darkstar subspaced:

WTF? You are the one who is ignoring official, boy. Or did you miss the "rocky boulder" part of the game?

LOL, Darkstar, this is the funniest thing I read all day. Whether or it has a nickel/iron composition or nor its still a rock.

[Master of Ossus]

I'll have to write that one down, somewhere. I think this is the second time DarkStar has accused me of ignoring canon rules. I simply cannot believe his logic.

[DarkStar]

Look, DarkStar, I will say, hypothetically, that they are rocky asteroids, though they are clearly Nickel-Iron in behavior, texture, and color. If they are made up of Silicon Dioxide, then they will have a higher specific-heat than Nickel-Iron asteroids, and a higher melting point, AND a higher vaporization point and heat of fusion. That would make the ISD's ability to vaporize one with a single hit even MORE impressive (by a hell of a lot--nearly two orders of magnitude). By arguing that they are not Nickel-Iron, you are in fact admitting to much higher weapons-yields on ISD's, something which you do not want (particularly since in another thread you stated that ICS is both non-canonical [which is true, to an extent], and that it is completely unacceptable because its firepowers are clearly not seen onscreen). You can either say that their firepowers are very high, or you can admit that the ISD's ability to resist collision is as high as we claim. You can't have your cake and eat it, too. One or the other is correct. You cannot have it both ways. Do not come back and say that your point was that we don't really know what the asteroids were made of, and that that was your only original point. Debate this in a reasonable fashion. Either the collision resistance of an ISD is as high as we are claiming, OR ISD firepower is far greater than was originally though. Those are the two possibilities I see presented, here. One of them is correct (or, perhaps, even both of them, to a limited extent).

What I want is irrelevant. What I have chosen is at hand... I have chosen to accept that the facts of the canon are to be obeyed.

If the ESB asteroids were vaporized, and if the material they were composed of would require more energy to vaporize, then I would accept higher firepower figures. However, that's a lot of ifs for you to have to work on.

[Master of Ossus]

DAMN YOU, DUMBSHIT LOOK AT THIS! You started by saying that we don't know that the asteroids were nickel-iron. Okay, I can accept that (barely, they appear to be nickel-iron in every way). Then you said that they were rocky. Most rocks are made up of Silicon Dioxide on Earth. Many of us have accepted that the Hoth asteroid field was created when a planet was seriously damaged in a colision with a stellar body. The SiO2 makeup of the asteroids is both consistent with what you claimed, and with what many people will accept from the books. If we assume that the asteroid the ISD vaporized was Silicon Dioxide, we can begin to make some calculations based on that.

Now, the asteroid in question (assuming nickel-iron composition), took about 4 MT worth of energy to destroy. Mike Wong made some calculations on that, and you only disagreed because you said that the asteroid was not nickel-iron. Now we move under the assumption that the asteroid is not nickel-iron, but is instead silicon dioxide. Silicon dioxide, in terms of volume, has a specific heat far higher than that of nickel-iron. Its melting point is considerably higher. The energy required to break its bonds down into a liquid state is higher than that of nickel-iron. Once liquid, its heat of vaporization is higher and its specific heat is still higher than that of nickel-iron. These factors make that asteroid require as much as two orders of magnitude more energy in order to vaporize it. I cannot believe that you do not understand this. Note that the Falcon withstood several hits from these now 300+MT turbolasers. That makes the Falcon's shields SIGNIFICANTLY stronger than those of the Enterprise-E. Your attempts to attack Wong have only led you into a deeper peril. Perhaps now you will realize that Wong's SW calculations are LOWER LIMITS, and you won't go screwing around with them in the hopes of either disproving them, or of making ST seem as powerful, or more so, as SW.