A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

PST: discuss Star Trek without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 03:41pm

Metahive wrote:
Ryag Han wrote:no, i haven't thought of that, because they aren't that omnipotent. sure, they might get the resources (even so they can't just create it, that is against the conservation of energy) put it all together and solve every single engineering problem, but the i ask the question why the fuck would they, super god-like beings, have any need for that? remember that guy who killed an entire race spread over light years while light years away? really? two thousand like him? what, they need a place to congregate? lolol

Conservation of mass and energy doesn't mean much to them considering they can shrink a starship down to christmas ornament size and vice versa with a snap of the fingers. As for motivations, just to show the incredulous shmucks out there just how awesome they are? They aren't portrayed as the most modest species within Trek after all.

Also, the Dyson Sphere doesn't represent an "astronomical inaccuracy", more some sort of inexplicable feat of engineering. If you want a true astronomical mishap try the quasar that inexplicably shows up within the Milky Way galaxy in episode The Galileo Seven. Quasars, in case you don't know, are galaxy sized stellar phenomena themselves. At least the remastered episodes made it look a bit more like a real quasar instead of some indefinable lump of gas.


well, at least you bring up something other than speculations.
sure they seam brake conservation of mass and energy, but that dose not mean they just break it, they most likely bypass it or, as far as we know, there's more to it than we know, and its neither. anyways, i didn't see hundreds of spaceships full of people that are all like "oh my god, a DYSON SPHERE!" there's no one around. you might think that if they wanted to show off, they'd make it in a place and time when more people can actually see it, and NOT crash into it or be sucked into it for no apparent reason.

and it is an astronomical inaccuracy. the shear amount of resources, how the sun stays in the middle, not to mention that its somehow illuminated from the outside.

Image
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 03:43pm

Also, can you change your fucking sig. Its really massive and irritating.


i am just going to ignore you now. fucking racist.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 03:43pm

Ryag Han wrote:
Also, can you change your fucking sig. Its really massive and irritating.


i am just going to ignore you now
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby HMS Sophia » 2011-07-14 03:45pm

Ryag Han wrote:
Also, can you change your fucking sig. Its really massive and irritating.


i am just going to ignore you now. fucking racist.


Oh, fuck you sideways.
I didn't ask you to change it because I'm racist. I asked you to change it because its nearly a fucking page long. :banghead:
Okay, how about this. Can you shrink it any, have some of the lines on one line rather than breaking it all up?
"Seriously though, every time I see something like this I think 'Ooo, I'm living in the future'. Unfortunately it increasingly looks like it's going to be a cyberpunkish dystopia, where the poor eat recycled shit and the rich eat the poor." Evilsoup, on the future

StarGazer, an experiment in RPG creation

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 03:47pm

barnest2 wrote:
Ryag Han wrote:
Also, can you change your fucking sig. Its really massive and irritating.


i am just going to ignore you now. fucking racist.


Oh, fuck you sideways.
I didn't ask you to change it because I'm racist. I asked you to change it because its nearly a fucking page long. :banghead:
Okay, how about this. Can you shrink it any, have some of the lines on one line rather than breaking it all up?


no and no. if you have a problem with it, fuck you sideways, asshole.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 14864
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: In Denial
Contact:

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Batman » 2011-07-14 03:50pm

Ryag Han wrote:and it is an astronomical inaccuracy. the shear amount of resources, how the sun stays in the middle

none of which have anything to do with astronomy you twit.
, not to mention that its somehow illuminated from the outside. [/qute]
Vee, I dunno, maybe there's a star around to do that?
Quote:
Also, can you change your fucking sig. Its really massive and irritating.
i am just going to ignore you now.

The truth hurts sometimes.
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kids with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'

User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 8206
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: Bound in a nutshell
Contact:

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Eternal_Freedom » 2011-07-14 03:51pm

and it is an astronomical inaccuracy. the shear amount of resources, how the sun stays in the middle, not to mention that its somehow illuminated from the outside.


Only the last of these even relates to astronomy. Astronomy is the study of the night sky. The things you list involve engineering and logistics, not astronomy. Even the relative position of the star would be more celestial dynamics or mechanics, not astronomy.
"I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams" - Hamlet

“I’ve always thought the Yankees had something to do with it.” - Confederate General George Pickett, on being asked why his charge at Ghettysburg failed

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.

User avatar
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby HMS Sophia » 2011-07-14 03:51pm

Okay, fine, whatever. anyway:

the shear amount of resources

If we accept it was the act of an omnipotent being, I think we can safely assume they created the resources. After all, when Q shrinks the enterprise, where does the rest of the ship go? And where do the resources come from when he brings it back?

how the sun stays in the middle

How does the sun stay in the middle of the earth's orbit?....

not to mention that its somehow illuminated from the outside

Bad lighting department? But seriously, how much light would hit it from the stars around it?

The truth hurts sometimes.

Was that at me or him? :?
"Seriously though, every time I see something like this I think 'Ooo, I'm living in the future'. Unfortunately it increasingly looks like it's going to be a cyberpunkish dystopia, where the poor eat recycled shit and the rich eat the poor." Evilsoup, on the future

StarGazer, an experiment in RPG creation

User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 8206
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: Bound in a nutshell
Contact:

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Eternal_Freedom » 2011-07-14 03:57pm

As for why the star remained in the centre? Well, even if the sphere masses as much as the star, its spread out evenly across the whole thing. So for the star, it experiences a net gravitational pull of zero as any single force will be cancelled out by the one on the far side.

That's basic mechanics mate. You might try learning some stuff before coming and arguing.
"I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams" - Hamlet

“I’ve always thought the Yankees had something to do with it.” - Confederate General George Pickett, on being asked why his charge at Ghettysburg failed

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 03:57pm

none of which have anything to do with astronomy you twit
well that shows just how uninformed you are. resources=good luck finding and mining them. sun in the middle..do i even need to explain why its nonsense?
Vee, I dunno, maybe there's a star around to do that?

well, and where do we ever hear of it, see it or otherwise? im tired of speculations.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Metahive » 2011-07-14 03:59pm

Ryag Han wrote:sure they seam brake conservation of mass and energy, but that dose not mean they just break it, they most likely bypass it or, as far as we know, there's more to it than we know, and its neither.

Dude, that's a species that can alter the gravitational constant of the universe on a whim! If taken to the extreme it means they could potentially cause Big Bangs and Big Crunches at will. You really think crapping out a big, hollow metal ball is beyond their capabilities?

anyways, i didn't see hundreds of spaceships full of people that are all like "oh my god, a DYSON SPHERE!" there's no one around. you might think that if they wanted to show off, they'd make it in a place and time when more people can actually see it, and NOT crash into it or be sucked into it for no apparent reason.

You're really getting too hung up on this example. Stop being a concrete thinker, it was just a potential explanation. And anyways, it might not have been to impress the rabble but some of the other god-like beings who presumably don't need starships to observe stuff.
People at birth are naturally good. Their natures are similar, but their habits make them different from each other.
-Sanzi Jing (Three Character Classic)

Saddam’s crime was so bad we literally spent decades looking for our dropped monocles before we could harumph up the gumption to address it
-User Indigo Jump on Pharyngula

O God, please don't let me die today, tomorrow would be so much better!
-Traditional Spathi morning prayer

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:00pm

Another inaccuracy is the sphere should actually still be visible. Maybe not to the naked eye, but infrared sensors should have at least seen it.
yes, but we see it IN VISIBLE LIGHT

The light from the sun inside never goes away. Unless it's a perfect insulator - meaning the temperature inside would constantly be rising.... didn't happen - the same power the sun puts out would eventually be radiated out by the sphere.
then it had to have more holes like the one it used to suck the Enterprise in, but didn't they say there was NO entrance whatsoever?
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 8206
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: Bound in a nutshell
Contact:

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Eternal_Freedom » 2011-07-14 04:00pm

And I'm tired of your bullshit statements.

do i even need to explain why its nonsense?


Yes, please explain. We are clearly so very inferior to you, O Lord of the Forum Debates! [/sarcasm]

I said it before and I'll say it again. Put up or shut up.
"I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams" - Hamlet

“I’ve always thought the Yankees had something to do with it.” - Confederate General George Pickett, on being asked why his charge at Ghettysburg failed

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:03pm

anyways, i didn't see hundreds of spaceships full of people that are all like "oh my god, a DYSON SPHERE!" there's no one around. you might think that if they wanted to show off, they'd make it in a place and time when more people can actually see it, and NOT crash into it or be sucked into it for no apparent reason.

You're really getting too hung up on this example. Stop being a concrete thinker, it was just a potential explanation. And anyways, it might not have been to impress the rabble but some of the other god-like beings who presumably don't need starships to observe stuff.[/quote]

so they ant to impress other god-like being...that most likely also have the same ability, and can do it in an instant as well. the other god-like beings would be like "big deal, my 1 million year old son did that last millennium!"
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Serafina
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5246
Joined: 2009-01-07 05:37pm
Location: Germany

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Serafina » 2011-07-14 04:04pm

Destructionator XIII wrote:
Ryag Han wrote:and it is an astronomical inaccuracy. the shear amount of resources, how the sun stays in the middle, not to mention that its somehow illuminated from the outside.


Hah.

Another inaccuracy is the sphere should actually still be visible. Maybe not to the naked eye, but infrared sensors should have at least seen it.

The light from the sun inside never goes away. Unless it's a perfect insulator - meaning the temperature inside would constantly be rising.... didn't happen - the same power the sun puts out would eventually be radiated out by the sphere.


So ultimately the dyson sphere is just as "bright" as the sun inside, just with a different kind of emission. The sensors should have seen it, regardless of gravity.
It could actually make a difference. While the same amount of radiation is, well, radiated away, it now radiates from a much larger surface. That might change how the Dyson Sphere looks, so that it would look differently from the star on it's own from a distance.
SoS:NBA GALE Force
"Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent." - Sir Nitram
"The world owes you nothing but painful lessons" - CaptainChewbacca
"The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of a mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one." - Wilhelm Stekel
"In 1969 it was easier to send a man to the Moon than to have the public accept a homosexual" - Broomstick

Divine Administration - of Gods and Bureaucracy (Worm/Exalted)

User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Metahive » 2011-07-14 04:04pm

And even if he does, how's TNG crappier than ENT just for featuring a Dyson Sphere? I don't see the connection. To enjoy escapist sci-fi you already have to supress quite a bit of disbelief, but ENT wasn't exactly any "harder" than TNG.
People at birth are naturally good. Their natures are similar, but their habits make them different from each other.
-Sanzi Jing (Three Character Classic)

Saddam’s crime was so bad we literally spent decades looking for our dropped monocles before we could harumph up the gumption to address it
-User Indigo Jump on Pharyngula

O God, please don't let me die today, tomorrow would be so much better!
-Traditional Spathi morning prayer

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:07pm

Yes, please explain. We are clearly so very inferior to you, O Lord of the Forum Debates!


stars move along the galaxy. the sun has a velocity of 220 km/s around the galactic core. the sphere would need the same speed to keep the star in the middle, otherwise gravity would be bigger on one side and smaller on the other side of the superstructure, and you get, a large, pretty hole in your Dyson sphere.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby HMS Sophia » 2011-07-14 04:09pm

Ryag Han wrote:
Yes, please explain. We are clearly so very inferior to you, O Lord of the Forum Debates!


stars move along the galaxy. the sun has a velocity of 220 km/s around the galactic core. the sphere would need the same speed to keep the star in the middle, otherwise gravity would be bigger on one side and smaller on the other side of the superstructure, and you get, a large, pretty hole in your Dyson sphere.


Would you though? if the Dyson sphere was constructed essentially in the orbit of a sun (as it takes up an entire orbital path) would the constructor not already be travelling at those speeds as the sphere is constructed. Therefore when it is completed, the sun and the sphere will be travelling at equal speeds etc etc, and no big hole appears?
"Seriously though, every time I see something like this I think 'Ooo, I'm living in the future'. Unfortunately it increasingly looks like it's going to be a cyberpunkish dystopia, where the poor eat recycled shit and the rich eat the poor." Evilsoup, on the future

StarGazer, an experiment in RPG creation

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:16pm

How does the sun stay in the middle of the earth's orbit?....

gravity, but guess what, Earth is 333,000 smaller than the sun, and is free to do orbit. there's a difference between orbit and keeping a star in the middle of giant hollowed metal ball.

If we accept it was the act of an omnipotent being, I think we can safely assume they created the resources. After all, when Q shrinks the enterprise, where does the rest of the ship go? And where do the resources come from when he brings it back?

so...magic!

Bad lighting department? But seriously, how much light would hit it from the stars around it?

with no binary companion, it should be only a dark silhouette against the blackness of space. but ok, lets go for now with a binary companion. if its to close to the middle star, its gravity would make things worse. to far, and there would be to much light. the far away binary companion would look like just a brighter star, not enough for the amount we saw in the episode.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:18pm

barnest2 wrote:
Ryag Han wrote:
Yes, please explain. We are clearly so very inferior to you, O Lord of the Forum Debates!


stars move along the galaxy. the sun has a velocity of 220 km/s around the galactic core. the sphere would need the same speed to keep the star in the middle, otherwise gravity would be bigger on one side and smaller on the other side of the superstructure, and you get, a large, pretty hole in your Dyson sphere.


Would you though? if the Dyson sphere was constructed essentially in the orbit of a sun (as it takes up an entire orbital path) would the constructor not already be travelling at those speeds as the sphere is constructed. Therefore when it is completed, the sun and the sphere will be travelling at equal speeds etc etc, and no big hole appears?



that's a interesting idea, but as they would build more of it, the gravity from the sun would disturb its orbit, and they'd be forced to constantly use energy to keep it in orbit.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby HMS Sophia » 2011-07-14 04:21pm

Ryag Han wrote:
barnest2 wrote:
Would you though? if the Dyson sphere was constructed essentially in the orbit of a sun (as it takes up an entire orbital path) would the constructor not already be travelling at those speeds as the sphere is constructed. Therefore when it is completed, the sun and the sphere will be travelling at equal speeds etc etc, and no big hole appears?



that's a interesting idea, but as they would build more of it, the gravity from the sun would disturb its orbit, and they'd be forced to constantly use energy to keep it in orbit.



What if, and its a big if, you constructed what are essentially a series of rings. You can either do this in a distant orbit and then boost them in, or build it up a ring at a time, so that it starts out as essentially a Niven ring, and then is slowly built up into a dyson sphere?

(also thanks Destuct. However, even managing it for a few million years is awesome)
"Seriously though, every time I see something like this I think 'Ooo, I'm living in the future'. Unfortunately it increasingly looks like it's going to be a cyberpunkish dystopia, where the poor eat recycled shit and the rich eat the poor." Evilsoup, on the future

StarGazer, an experiment in RPG creation

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:22pm

Metahive wrote:And even if he does, how's TNG crappier than ENT just for featuring a Dyson Sphere? I don't see the connection. To enjoy escapist sci-fi you already have to supress quite a bit of disbelief, but ENT wasn't exactly any "harder" than TNG.


no one said that. but everybody is complaining about the Qu'nos thing, while TNG had this, and no one says anything.
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 14864
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: In Denial
Contact:

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Batman » 2011-07-14 04:23pm

barnest 2 wrote:Was that at me or him? :?

Sorry, me and the quote tags aren't really on speaking terms. That was directed at Ryag's reaction to your comment that his sig was totally tiny and you had no problem at all with it. :wink:
Ryag Han wrote:
none of which have anything to do with astronomy you twit
well that shows just how uninformed you are. resources=good luck finding and mining them. sun in the middle..do i even need to explain why its nonsense?

You not only have to explain why this is nonsense, you have to explain what any of that has to do with bad astronomy.
Vee, I dunno, maybe there's a star around to do that?

well, and where do we ever hear of it, see it or otherwise? im tired of speculations.

Sucks to be you then. It's undeniably illuminated from the outside, for which the most likely candidate is a nearby star. You don't like that idea, find a better one.
'Next time I let Superman take charge, just hit me. Real hard.'
'You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors. I'm a rich kids with issues. Lots of issues.'
'No. No dating for the Batman. It might cut into your brooding time.'
'Tactically we have multiple objectives. So we need to split into teams.'-'Dibs on the Amazon!'
'Hey, we both have a Martian's phone number on our speed dial. I think I deserve the benefit of the doubt.'
'You know, for a guy with like 50 different kinds of vision, you sure are blind.'

User avatar
Ryag Han
Youngling
Posts: 138
Joined: 2009-12-27 04:47pm

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby Ryag Han » 2011-07-14 04:26pm

barnest2 wrote:
Ryag Han wrote:
barnest2 wrote:
Would you though? if the Dyson sphere was constructed essentially in the orbit of a sun (as it takes up an entire orbital path) would the constructor not already be travelling at those speeds as the sphere is constructed. Therefore when it is completed, the sun and the sphere will be travelling at equal speeds etc etc, and no big hole appears?



that's a interesting idea, but as they would build more of it, the gravity from the sun would disturb its orbit, and they'd be forced to constantly use energy to keep it in orbit.



What if, and its a big if, you constructed what are essentially a series of rings. You can either do this in a distant orbit and then boost them in, or build it up a ring at a time, so that it starts out as essentially a Niven ring, and then is slowly built up into a dyson sphere?

(also thanks Destuct. However, even managing it for a few million years is awesome)



then it raises the question: why make it complete solid?
something like this would be more tangible
Image
95% of people laugh at other people because they are different. Copy this into your profile if you are a part of the 5% that laughs at the other 95% because they're all the same

Image
RAT-FLAIR

User avatar
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: A question about Star Trek: Enterprise

Postby HMS Sophia » 2011-07-14 04:27pm

Ryag Han wrote:then it raises the question: why make it complete solid?
something like this would be more tangible
Image


... Because a solid one is more cool? :P
"Seriously though, every time I see something like this I think 'Ooo, I'm living in the future'. Unfortunately it increasingly looks like it's going to be a cyberpunkish dystopia, where the poor eat recycled shit and the rich eat the poor." Evilsoup, on the future

StarGazer, an experiment in RPG creation


Return to “Pure Star Trek”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests