Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

SWvST: the subject of the main site.

Moderator: Vympel

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

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

Actually, it doesn't matter if I use km or m...as long as I don't screw up the last step, which should have been 3816315/0.01, not 10. So it looks like your numbers are alright.
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
HMS Sophia
Jedi Master
Posts: 1231
Joined: 2010-08-22 07:47am
Location: Watching the levee break

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by HMS Sophia »

Ah, but, even if you have that space, would it not be better to devote it too armour, weaponry, shields, hangers and other war-fighting technologies, rather than lugging around an industrial base?
Also, engines... You're going to need a lot to move that thing...
"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
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

Yep, if it's not absolutely necessary for the station's functionality, the available space should better be spend on improving its function as a weapon.

Also, how voluminous would be hypermatter mining+refining equipment capable of producing the amounts of fuel the DSII needs anyway? A Venator SD guzzles up 40000 tons of fuel every second at peak performance (EDIT ROTS:ICS). I wonder what amounts of fuel the DSII needs under similar conditions.
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
darthy
Padawan Learner
Posts: 185
Joined: 2011-03-11 09:23am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by darthy »

Do you remember what you wrote before?
Doesn't get much more vague than that. Sureee I know exactly what you're talking about, whatever you say. The enterprise D came along and repaired the power supply so it's not impossible that someone else would have was the point I was getting at.
Your opinion is worthless. It means nothing to this debate. You have been trying to defend this statement as a fact for several pages now. You have just stated that you are not claiming as a fact. Concession accepted.
:o noooooooo? really?? wow you're so smart.... oh wait... I've been saying that all along since like page 6. I'm the only one that's been saying it and I've been screaming it every time it's been brought up. I brought the whole tangant into perspect and showed that whoever wins that argument gets nowhere in the big picture. It's all pointless. Are you blind?
With transporter technology it's unknown how long someone can survive in suspended animation. If you were expecting me to explain how that is, I don't think any further explanation would work if you haven't gotten it by now.

Let's bring this nice little tangent into prospective now with the events that led up to it:

-I provided canon proof that stated that the transfer of knowledge between individual and borg is complete
-Eleas didn't think the transfer of knowledge from individuals to the collective is complete
-I provided canon proof that when someone becomes assimilated their neural patterns are transferred to the collective
-I provided canon proof with dialogue and visuals which support that neural patterns contain all knowledge of a person
-I mentioned that the neural patterns got stored in the computer of deep space nine in episode "our man bashir"
-I said that since neural patterns can be stored indefinitely like data.

The idea is that if data was stored and transferred here that it could also conceivably be transferred and stored from an individual to the collective. Then we went on and on about me having to justify that the patterns can be stored indefinitely even though it had nothing to do with the point I was making: that all knowledge can be transferred from the individual to the collective. You've no doubt chosen to accept a definition of indefinite to imply no limit whereas I was using the definition to mean an unknown or unclear limit. The fact that a person's complete knowledge can be stored on a computer in the first place is all the proof I needed to make the point I was trying to make. Whether or not someone's pattern can be stored for only minutes, days, years, or centuries is irreverent.
I underlined yours. Does it matter that I've already said that the claim of how long someone can survive inside a transporter buffer is irrelavent to the discussion?
Nope, I was using episode relics as an example of someone being stored in a transporter. That's why I mentioned the episode right after that part and not after the word "indefinitely". Feel free to take the "indefinitely" as an opinion as it contributes nothing to the argument of whether knowledge is completely transfered to the borg.
see? you can't claim that I'm saying something that I'm not, debunk it, then say i'm wrong for that reason. Plus I sad a few posts ago that this is all irrelavent. My statement that included the word "indefinitely" can be taken as an opinion and not a fact for the sake of argument. But you have not proven the statement false in the way it was intended so I can't concede the point.
I already clearly stated that the Death Star superlaser does not impart an unlimited amount of energy. This is not a no-limit fallacy.
but you're making arguments that state that no amount of energy can take out a micro black hole then are using this to argue that a super laser won't be able to.
That is an outright lie. The existance of neutronium has not even been proven, let alone has it been produced in a laboratory. Multiple experiments have produced black holes, including the one I have already referred you to.
Without me bothering to go to the link you provided earlier, let's pretend for a moment that you're right and scientists have created a black hole. Does that mean that Earth cannot be destroyed by a super laser? I wouldn't think so myself. When I said that the death star would handle the Dovin basal by using its super laser, you immediately assumed the death star would have to be firing at a black hole first and a mini-black hole would be used to protect them. Would the Dovin basal be destroyed without a micro-black hole to protect it? If so, its survival is dependent on using this as a defense.

Concievably a Death Star could escape from a Dovin Basal's gravity well with a hyperwave inertial momentum sustainer if they needed to.

Also according to sw encyclopedia:
By concentrating gavitic fields, the drovin basal could swallow incoming blasts through miniature singularities. New Republic pilots developed tactics to thwart this feature, including overloading the dovin basal with stutterfire, and employing ball bearing missiles that prevented the creatures from accurately defending against proton torpedoes fired concurrently.
It stands to reason that the borg would use a tactic that they have assimilated knowledge for which they know works. Even if they don't use this, if a Dovin Basal can be overloaded with stutterfire, ball bearing missiles, and proton torpedeos then what's to prevent them from being overloaded by all of the death star's weaponry.
Ace_of_Spades
Redshirt
Posts: 7
Joined: 2011-02-25 11:53pm
Location: Viva Lost Wages

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Ace_of_Spades »

Wouldn't it actually make more sense for the DSII to not have any industrial capability of its own? Keeping a weapon of that magnitude on a short leash is a good idea for someone as crafty as Palpatine.
aaaaa0
Redshirt
Posts: 41
Joined: 2010-08-26 12:47am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by aaaaa0 »

Metahive wrote:Yep, if it's not absolutely necessary for the station's functionality, the available space should better be spend on improving its function as a weapon.
The thing is, suppose you sacrifice 1% of the DS2's volume -- resulting in space equal to the land mass of a terrestrial planet -- so you can remove the huge fleet of ships following it around shipping it spare parts, supplies, crew, etc to it every second it is running.

Logistics is important, right? "Amateurs study strategy; professionals study logistics."

Even if you can't squeeze a hyper-matter facility (how big is one anyway?) into the thing, there's plenty of other stuff that a military needs pretty much continuously to order to operate. And anything is going to be less dense than ultra-dense magic hyper-fuel, right?

As the ultimate self-contained mobile military base and resupply depot, the DS2 would be totally invaluable. With a few billion people living on it, it would be able to field reinforcements as needed.

After all, with the size it has, it's roughly capable of having the population and manufacturing capabilities of a whole planet at its disposal.

The Empire could drop it in pretty much any system with raw materials, and have it manufacture entire war fleets, or resupply its normal fleets, or resupply a ground invasion indefintely.

The DS2 would be a self-contained supply line that's virtually unassailable by any rebels or insurgents. I don't know of any military leader that wouldn't kill for a capability for that.
aaaaa0
Redshirt
Posts: 41
Joined: 2010-08-26 12:47am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by aaaaa0 »

Ace_of_Spades wrote:Wouldn't it actually make more sense for the DSII to not have any industrial capability of its own? Keeping a weapon of that magnitude on a short leash is a good idea for someone as crafty as Palpatine.
Isn't that why he put himself on the DS2 to begin with? It's his mobile throne room from which he can rule the galaxy with an iron fist? :D
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10361
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

aaaaa0 wrote:
Metahive wrote:Yep, if it's not absolutely necessary for the station's functionality, the available space should better be spend on improving its function as a weapon.
The thing is, suppose you sacrifice 1% of the DS2's volume -- resulting in space equal to the land mass of a terrestrial planet -- so you can remove the huge fleet of ships following it around shipping it spare parts, supplies, crew, etc to it every second it is running.

Logistics is important, right? "Amateurs study strategy; professionals study logistics."

Even if you can't squeeze a hyper-matter facility (how big is one anyway?) into the thing, there's plenty of other stuff that a military needs pretty much continuously to order to operate. And anything is going to be less dense than ultra-dense magic hyper-fuel, right?

As the ultimate self-contained mobile military base and resupply depot, the DS2 would be totally invaluable. With a few billion people living on it, it would be able to field reinforcements as needed.

After all, with the size it has, it's roughly capable of having the population and manufacturing capabilities of a whole planet at its disposal.

The Empire could drop it in pretty much any system with raw materials, and have it manufacture entire war fleets, or resupply its normal fleets, or resupply a ground invasion indefintely.

The DS2 would be a self-contained supply line that's virtually unassailable by any rebels or insurgents. I don't know of any military leader that wouldn't kill for a capability for that.
That basically a hybrid of the death Star and World Devastator concepts. Massive superweapon capable of direct action against enemy forces with devastating results, combined with someitnhg that can support itself indefinitely, provided raw materials are available.

Now there's a thought. The World Devastators didn't use hpermatter reactors. Something about black holes if I remember Dark Empire right. Which means they wouldn't necessarily need a hypermatter plant on board or refuelling to continue operating.

So what if we gave the DS2 the facilities aaaaa0 suggested and replace the hypermatter core with a power source not reliant on contant refuelling?
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

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

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

aaaaa0, answer me this, why shouldn't all the money, material and effort that'd go into building the DS and piling all those redundant features on it rather be put into producing a proportionate number of mundane starships with dedicated functions? There's simply no need for the DS to have these features, it's purpose is already rather questionable for the cost as is considering the only thing that it can do and which an proportionate number of starships can't is blowing up planets violently and that's unecessary overkill anyway so there's no point in making the thing even more expensive, especially when the enemy it's build against is a domestic guerilla that is already outgunned by a vast margin.
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
aaaaa0
Redshirt
Posts: 41
Joined: 2010-08-26 12:47am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by aaaaa0 »

Metahive wrote:aaaaa0, answer me this, why shouldn't all the money, material and effort that'd go into building the DS and piling all those redundant features on it rather be put into producing a proportionate number of mundane starships with dedicated functions?
Because the DS2 already needs a huge train of mundane starships following it around dropping off supplies *as is*. A huge train of mundane starships vulnerable to ambushes, interdiction, terrorist attacks, sabotage, infiltration. Those ships need protection too.

Having a vulnerable supply train, makes YOU more vulnerable.

The DS2, as specced has so much internal volume that using 1% of it doesn't seem like a big deal. If the SW universe can build World Devastators and Levithans, it makes no sense for the DS2 not to have it's own internal industrial base.

Given the energy it has access to, and the sheer amount of internal volume it has, it should pretty much be able to carry around the equipment and personel necessary to build almost anything that it needs from raw materials.

Hell, even the superlaser would be a great mining tool. Smash a planet into a debris field, then suck up the resources. :wink:
Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30165
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Simon_Jester »

aaaaa0 wrote:
Ace_of_Spades wrote:Wouldn't it actually make more sense for the DSII to not have any industrial capability of its own? Keeping a weapon of that magnitude on a short leash is a good idea for someone as crafty as Palpatine.
Isn't that why he put himself on the DS2 to begin with? It's his mobile throne room from which he can rule the galaxy with an iron fist? :D
Yes, but the Imperial throne room is not self-sufficient in, for example, food: presumably, Palpatine has to have his meals brought to him at some point.

For Palpatine, it's perfectly acceptable for his mobile command center/fleet base/throne room/planet buster to have a short logistical leash. He controls a vast network of bases and worlds throughout the galaxy. Even in the event of a civil war or other catastrophic threat to his power, he'll still be able to count on enough logistical support to keep the Death Star running- if he can't, he's got problems so big that even owning the Death Star won't let him keep control of the galaxy.

For a rebel against Palpatine, who somehow seizes control of the station while Palpatine isn't on board to stop him, having the Death Star on a short logistical leash is a nightmare. Because even though he holds the Death Star, he can't keep it fueled and supplied with spare parts, because Palpatine and his loyal minions still own the rest of the galaxy. Moreover, the continuous flow of supplies onto the station will make it easier for Palpatine's agents to infiltrate it and exploit any security backdoors or weaknesses built into the system on Palpatine's behalf.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov
User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

aaaa0 wrote:Because the DS2 already needs a huge train of mundane starships following it around dropping off supplies *as is*. A huge train of mundane starships vulnerable to ambushes, interdiction, terrorist attacks, sabotage, infiltration. Those ships need protection too.
All the money you'd use to install a giant, high-output hypermatter collector and refinery on the DSII could be used to build its escorts and tankers instead (and a number of smaller hypermatter refineries where it matters), ships and installations you could also use for different purposes other than servicing a planet buster which has a problem with severely limited usability. There's also the problem that it is more efficient to have the fuel come to the DS rather than the other way round. Think like an economist. The DSs' main use is to terrorize and intimidate the systems within the Empire into cooperation (as Grand Moff Tarkin clearly says in ANH). For that purpose it's sufficient to simply be in possession of it. Station it over Coruscant, that not only gives the imperial center of power a sturdy defense, it also reduces the logistical train considerably.

There is simply no use for a self-sufficient, planet-busting battlestation. The only justification would be if Palpatine planned an invasion of another galaxy, but that was never seen as a realistic possibility in the entire SW canon.
Hell, at a lower power setting, even the superlaser would be a great mining tool.
It would be helluva waste to use it for such a purpose, just as it would be using it as a giant tanker or troop transport like you proposed because there'd be very few occasions were it could be used in an efficient fashion justifying the cost and the effort. Again, you should approach the issue from an economic angle rather than a purely fanwankish one.
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
aaaaa0
Redshirt
Posts: 41
Joined: 2010-08-26 12:47am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by aaaaa0 »

Simon_Jester wrote:Yes, but the Imperial throne room is not self-sufficient in, for example, food: presumably, Palpatine has to have his meals brought to him at some point.
But that's the thing. With the power resources available to the Death Star 2, and the huge internal volume your food situation is trivially fixed. As long as you have some tiny amont of energy (relative to what the DS2 reactor can really put out), and you have access to some raw materials (nitrogen, carbon, oxygen, trace elements), you're set.

Growing your own food on-board now makes sabotage by poison, or seige by interdicting your food shipments practically impossible.

And that's presuming the SW universe has to do something as primitive as "growing crops" and can't just directly convert raw materials to food.
Simon_Jester wrote: For Palpatine, it's perfectly acceptable for his mobile command center/fleet base/throne room/planet buster to have a short logistical leash. He controls a vast network of bases and worlds throughout the galaxy. Even in the event of a civil war or other catastrophic threat to his power, he'll still be able to count on enough logistical support to keep the Death Star running- if he can't, he's got problems so big that even owning the Death Star won't let him keep control of the galaxy.

For a rebel against Palpatine, who somehow seizes control of the station while Palpatine isn't on board to stop him, having the Death Star on a short logistical leash is a nightmare. Because even though he holds the Death Star, he can't keep it fueled and supplied with spare parts, because Palpatine and his loyal minions still own the rest of the galaxy. Moreover, the continuous flow of supplies onto the station will make it easier for Palpatine's agents to infiltrate it and exploit any security backdoors or weaknesses built into the system on Palpatine's behalf.
Yeah, I agree, that's the best argument against the DS2 having an industrial base of its own.

On the other hand, the problems rebels would have seizing control of a Death Star with a billion people on board and a full industrial base seems to me to be similar to the problems the rebels would have seizing a loyal Empire member planet.

I'm guessing it would be a protracted full-on battle similar to a civil war, and the rebels tend to want to avoid those since the Empire has superior military power in any head-on confrontation.
aaaaa0
Redshirt
Posts: 41
Joined: 2010-08-26 12:47am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by aaaaa0 »

Metahive wrote:
aaaa0 wrote:Because the DS2 already needs a huge train of mundane starships following it around dropping off supplies *as is*. A huge train of mundane starships vulnerable to ambushes, interdiction, terrorist attacks, sabotage, infiltration. Those ships need protection too.
All the money you'd use to install a giant, high-output hypermatter collector and refinery on the DSII could be used to build its escorts and tankers instead (and a number of smaller hypermatter refineries where it matters), ships and installations you could also use for different purposes other than servicing a planet buster which has a problem with severely limited usability. There's also the problem that it is more efficient to have the fuel come to the DS rather than the other way round. Think like an economist. The DSs' main use is to terrorize and intimidate the systems within the Empire into cooperation (as Grand Moff Tarkin clearly says in ANH). For that purpose it's sufficient to simply be in possession of it. Station it over Coruscant, that not only gives the imperial center of power a sturdy defense, it also reduces the logistical train considerably.
In that case you don't need to make it 900 km in diameter. That's an even larger waste of material and money. All you need to do is make a ship just large enough to carry the superlaser, and enough fuel to fire it once or twice and then leave the area. Like an Eclipse.

My whole point is that the design of the DS2 is kind of irrational. It's big enough to host an entire planet's worth of industrial base. But it doesn't.
Metahive wrote:
Hell, at a lower power setting, even the superlaser would be a great mining tool.
It would be helluva waste to use it for such a purpose, just as it would be using it as a giant tanker or troop transport like you proposed because there'd be very few occasions were it could be used in an efficient fashion justifying the cost and the effort. Again, you should approach the issue from an economic angle rather than a purely fanwankish one.
I was kidding, hence the :wink:.
User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

The problem is less Rebels seizing it than some ambitious upstart like Zaarin pulling such a stunt. With what he had, a Grand Admiral's worth of warships and advanced starfighters, he managed to cause a big deal of damage to the Empire. If he had also a self-sufficient battlestation at hand he could almost already dicate Palpatine's terms of abdication.

EDIT:
aaaa0 wrote:In that case you don't need to make it 900 km in diameter. That's an even larger waste of material and money. All you need to do is make a ship just large enough to carry the superlaser, and enough fuel to fire it once or twice and then leave the area. Like an Eclipse.

My whole point is that the design of the DS2 is kind of irrational. It's big enough to host an entire planet's worth of industrial base. But it doesn't.
Well, the DSII was mainly there as irresistable bait for the Rebellion to spend most of its military assets on a futile attempt to destroy it. The DSII was an indulgent piece of luxury, hence Palpatine relying on smaller superweapons later like the aforementioned World Devastators or the more purpose-built Galaxy Gun.
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
Imperial528
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1798
Joined: 2010-05-03 06:19pm
Location: New England

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Imperial528 »

I don't remember the source(s), but I've seen instances of the DS 1 and 2 acting as mobile fleet bases, there's even hangars large enough for ISDs and SSDs to dock inside of them for repairs, or even construction.
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Darth Tedious »

aaaaa0 wrote:Having a vulnerable supply train, makes YOU more vulnerable.
Have you taken into account the difference that hyperspace makes? How is an enemy without gravtity well projectors going to intercept your supplies? Not to mention the DS2's ability to go pick them up itself...
darthy wrote:
Your opinion is worthless. It means nothing to this debate. You have been trying to defend this statement as a fact for several pages now. You have just stated that you are not claiming as a fact. Concession accepted.
:o noooooooo? really?? wow you're so smart.... oh wait... I've been saying that all along since like page 6. I'm the only one that's been saying it and I've been screaming it every time it's been brought up.
Yet you continued to defend you stance. Now that you have dismissed your own argument (leaving everyone else's assertions unchallenged), we can get onto more pressing matters.
darthy wrote:but you're making arguments that state that no amount of energy can take out a micro black hole then are using this to argue that a super laser won't be able to.
Are trying to use argumentum ad logicum? :lol:

I have asserted that the DS superlaser would not be able to 'take out' (real scientific term you use there :roll: ) a black hole.

I have already backed my assertion. With both a scientific principle and real-life experimental proof.

If you wish to make an assertion to the contrary, do so. Explain it, and provide evidence.

I'll now address your attempts to sidestep:
[quote"darthy"]Without me bothering to go to the link you provided earlier,[/quote]Because you wouldn't want to see evidence against what you're claiming. :roll:
darthy wrote: let's pretend for a moment that you're right and scientists have created a black hole.
Excuse me, you ignorant fucktard? Numerous scientists have created black holes. For fuck's sake, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider made one by accident! There's no need to pretend I'm right. Educate yourself.
[quote='darthy"]Does that mean that Earth cannot be destroyed by a super laser?[/quote]No. And I never claimed it did. Nice try at a strawman, though. :wink:
darthy wrote:When I said that the death star would handle the Dovin basal by using its super laser, you immediately assumed the death star would have to be firing at a black hole first and a mini-black hole would be used to protect them.
Why would I assume that? There's no need to use a black hole to protect... a black hole. Another pretty strawman.
darthy wrote:Concievably a Death Star could escape from a Dovin Basal's gravity well with a hyperwave inertial momentum sustainer if they needed to.
:lol: The hyperwave initial momentum sustainer was invented by the New Republic. They don't exist in your scenario.
darthy wrote:Also according to sw encyclopedia:
By concentrating gavitic fields, the drovin basal could swallow incoming blasts through miniature singularities. New Republic pilots developed tactics to thwart this feature, including overloading the dovin basal with stutterfire, and employing ball bearing missiles that prevented the creatures from accurately defending against proton torpedoes fired concurrently.
It stands to reason that the borg would use a tactic that they have assimilated knowledge for which they know works.
The New Republic only developed this tactic after having fought the Yuuzhan Vong for some time. Are you suggesting prior assimilation of a tactic that hadn't been invented yet? :lol: :wanker: :wtf: Need I remind you again that the New Republic don't exist?

I'll also point out that overloading a dovin basal is not the same as 'taking out' a black hole that it has created.

Explain how the black hole will be 'taken out'. Why are you not debunking everything I say?
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Darth Tedious »

Darth Tedious wrote:
aaaaa0 wrote:Having a vulnerable supply train, makes YOU more vulnerable.
Have you taken into account the difference that hyperspace makes? How is an enemy without gravtity well projectors going to intercept your supplies? Not to mention the DS2's ability to go pick them up itself...
darthy wrote:
Your opinion is worthless. It means nothing to this debate. You have been trying to defend this statement as a fact for several pages now. You have just stated that you are not claiming as a fact. Concession accepted.
:o noooooooo? really?? wow you're so smart.... oh wait... I've been saying that all along since like page 6. I'm the only one that's been saying it and I've been screaming it every time it's been brought up.
Yet you continued to defend you stance. Now that you have dismissed your own argument (leaving everyone else's assertions unchallenged), we can get onto more pressing matters.
darthy wrote:but you're making arguments that state that no amount of energy can take out a micro black hole then are using this to argue that a super laser won't be able to.
Are trying to use argumentum ad logicum? :lol:

I have asserted that the DS superlaser would not be able to 'take out' (real scientific term you use there :roll: ) a black hole.

I have already backed my assertion. With both a scientific principle and real-life experimental proof.

If you wish to make an assertion to the contrary, do so. Explain it, and provide evidence.

I'll now address your attempts to sidestep:
[quote"darthy"]Without me bothering to go to the link you provided earlier,
Because you wouldn't want to see evidence against what you're claiming. :roll:
darthy wrote: let's pretend for a moment that you're right and scientists have created a black hole.
Excuse me, you ignorant fucktard? Numerous scientists have created black holes. For fuck's sake, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider made one by accident! There's no need to pretend I'm right. Educate yourself.
darthy wrote:Does that mean that Earth cannot be destroyed by a super laser?
No. And I never claimed it did. Nice try at a strawman, though. :wink:
darthy wrote:When I said that the death star would handle the Dovin basal by using its super laser, you immediately assumed the death star would have to be firing at a black hole first and a mini-black hole would be used to protect them.
Why would I assume that? There's no need to use a black hole to protect... a black hole. Another pretty strawman.
darthy wrote:Concievably a Death Star could escape from a Dovin Basal's gravity well with a hyperwave inertial momentum sustainer if they needed to.
:lol: The hyperwave initial momentum sustainer was invented by the New Republic. They don't exist in your scenario.
darthy wrote:Also according to sw encyclopedia:
By concentrating gavitic fields, the drovin basal could swallow incoming blasts through miniature singularities. New Republic pilots developed tactics to thwart this feature, including overloading the dovin basal with stutterfire, and employing ball bearing missiles that prevented the creatures from accurately defending against proton torpedoes fired concurrently.
It stands to reason that the borg would use a tactic that they have assimilated knowledge for which they know works.
The New Republic only developed this tactic after having fought the Yuuzhan Vong for some time. Are you suggesting prior assimilation of a tactic that hadn't been invented yet? :lol: :wanker: :wtf: Need I remind you again that the New Republic don't exist?

I'll also point out that overloading a dovin basal is not the same as 'taking out' a black hole that it has created.

Explain how the black hole will be 'taken out'. Why are you not debunking everything I say?[/quote]

EDIT:Fixed a faulty quote.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Batman
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 16329
Joined: 2002-07-09 04:51am
Location: Seriously thinking about moving to Marvel because so much of the DCEU stinks

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Batman »

This is pretty sad. The ability of completely ordinary Star Wars weapons to deal with dovin basals is right there in the canon but darthy can't even think of a credible way the superlaser can deal with them.
'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 kid 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.'
darthy
Padawan Learner
Posts: 185
Joined: 2011-03-11 09:23am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by darthy »

Yet you continued to defend you stance. Now that you have dismissed your own argument (leaving everyone else's assertions unchallenged), we can get onto more pressing matters.
I will defend a stance to no end while making an effort to change the subject. I wouldn't want to send anyone the message that I conceded. :) I think you're just butt hurt because I've gotten you to a concede many times. You've even conceded that the borg would win this scenario so I don't see why you're still blabbering. Plus I debunked your fed defending scenario with ease.
Are trying to use argumentum ad logicum?
hmm logical terminology... doesn't work well with you. You're just not the logical type. You spelled "logicam" wrong and probably never know what you're talking about. Just stick with the "fuck off :finger: " stuff you were doing earlier when you got trapped. Hey did you get the name Darth Tedious because of how tedious it is to sort through all the logical holes in virtually every statement you make?
Excuse me, you ignorant fucktard? Numerous scientists have created black holes. For fuck's sake, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider made one by accident! There's no need to pretend I'm right. Educate yourself.

I love the irony of this statement. See? Now you're being yourself. Quit trying to pretend you're a rational thinker, that's just not who you are. If a scientist says it then it must be true, something like that right? Pure argument from authority. I've taken a look the link you showed me since I can see that you were starting to cling to it. This is pop science which turns out to be wrong often times that's why I kinda rolled my eyes at it. The papers published are only in their first stages of peer review. If you truly wanted to "educate yourself", you would approach things like this with a skeptical eye. I noticed you kinda did this with the Neutronium but you failed to do it with material when you think it supports your argument :-|.

It says Ulf Leonhardt built a black hole in 2008 in the link you gave. Here's another http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080306/ ... 8.651.html It's not really a black hole. They call it an imitation black hole made of light and completely harmless (laughing under my breath while I read that) but they think it imitates some of the properties of black holes pretty good. Hey does this mean if I tape two bottles together with water inside them that I've made a tornado? 8) I'm sure a superlaser could destroy this type of "blackhole".

So you'll buy into this stuff about hawking radiation, which supposedly exist where stars exploded millions of light years from here but you don't accept anything scientific when it comes to neutronium from our own sun which at least we know exists.

Look how your article ends in the link you gave:
Physicist Dentcho Genov of Louisiana Tech University, who also makes lab-bench-scale black holes using a class of materials called metamaterials, points out that this is only an indirect proof of Hawking radiation. A direct proof would have to come from observing a tiny black hole radiating away in space.

"To have a direct proof is very difficult. I don't know if in my lifetime or in my kids' or grandkids' lifetime that's going to happen," Genov said. "The actual full-scale experimental validation of Hawking radiation is still far away in the future. But this one I think is sufficient."
This might be interesting if you're into pop science but as something to use in an argument the best you can hope for is to try to pass this off as a joke than to have it mentioned it as concrete evidence for an outcome in a real life situation.
I have already backed my assertion. With both a scientific principle and real-life experimental proof.
Your assertion is backed with a nerf gun.
Why would I assume that? There's no need to use a black hole to protect... a black hole. Another pretty strawman.
yes you sure love creating pretty strawman. A Dovin Basal and a black hole are two different things.

I'll remind you of what was said so you don't have to go back and look:

You said:
You will now explain how the Borg will deal with a deployed Dovin Basal.
Then I said:
You must be assuming the super laser can't take them out when you say that...why?
Then You Said:
Wait...
You're going to take out a fucking BLACK HOLE with a superlaser?
That's the best one I've heard so far.
I said the borg would take out the Dovin Basal with the superlaser. You immediately assumed they would be firing at a blackhole in the process. I can no doubt take this as a concession that the creature Dovin Basal would not survive a hit from the super laser without a blackhole to protect it. I was making this clear, but it went over your head anyway. You no doubt are counting on this creature to make a black hole for you.
The New Republic only developed this tactic after having fought the Yuuzhan Vong for some time. Are you suggesting prior assimilation of a tactic that hadn't been invented yet? :lol: :wanker: :wtf: Need I remind you again that the New Republic don't exist?
now now... we don't know when this scenario takes place. Sure I said it takes place after the death star II was created and after your super weapons no longer exist. It also takes place after this situations where the weaknesses of the the Dovin Basal are made fully aware to the empire and then to the borg via assimilation. Thanks for helping me back you into that hole.
I'll also point out that overloading a dovin basal is not the same as 'taking out' a black hole that it has created.
Actually it should. These aren't black holes either in the strictest sense. They create gravity wells that function like black holes as stated in the essential guide for aliens. A gravity well merely simulates the presence of a large body in space, it's different than a black hole in that sense.Once the death star destroys the coralskipper and dovin basal, the gravity well goes away with no energy feeding it.
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Darth Tedious »

I wrote:If you wish to make an assertion to the contrary, do so. Explain it, and provide evidence.
darthy wrote:This might be interesting if you're into pop science but as something to use in an argument the best you can hope for is to try to pass this off as a joke than to have it mentioned it as concrete evidence for an outcome in a real life situation.
If it's all such laughable 'pop-science', you should have no trouble providing counterevidence. You have not even attempted to do so.
darthy wrote:So you'll buy into this stuff about hawking radiation, which supposedly exist where stars exploded millions of light years from here but you don't accept anything scientific when it comes to neutronium from our own sun which at least we know exists.
If you wish to assert that neutronium is real and exists within Sol, do so.
If you wish to contend against the existance of Hawking radiation, do so.
If not, spare us your worthless rhetoric.
darthy wrote:Plus I debunked your fed defending scenario with ease.
Instead of claiming an imaginary victory in an unrelated debate, perhaps you should go back to that thread and try again.
darthy wrote:I will defend a stance to no end while making an effort to change the subject. I wouldn't want to send anyone the message that I conceded. :)
This is news to noone.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
User avatar
Metahive
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2795
Joined: 2010-09-02 09:08am
Location: Little Korea in Big Germany

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Metahive »

darthy wrote:So you'll buy into this stuff about hawking radiation, which supposedly exist where stars exploded millions of light years from here but you don't accept anything scientific when it comes to neutronium from our own sun which at least we know exists.
Quick question, darthy, when has our sun gone supernova? I'm just asking because you think our sun contains neutronium which is only theoretically found within neutron stars, which in turn are the remnants of stars that went supernova, stars with way more mass than our sun I might add.

Pig-ignorance, thy name be darthy.
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
darthy
Padawan Learner
Posts: 185
Joined: 2011-03-11 09:23am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by darthy »

If it's all such laughable 'pop-science', you should have no trouble providing counterevidence. You have not even attempted to do so.
I'll remind you what you said:
The DS superlaser does not impart an unlimited amount of energy, so that would be a strawman (were I to say it).
In the event of a laser imparting more energy to a black hole than it can readily absorb, the excess energy is released as Hawking radiation. Read this if you would like some proof of my claim. You will now produce evidence to show that a black hole could be destroyed as you claim, or concede the point.
You have made a claim that hawking radiation exists. You provided a link which proves nothing toward the claim, it just shows how scientists are trying to prove its existence. The burden of proof is still on you to prove it. Your own article provides all the evidence I need that its existence is not proven even after 37 years of it being postulated. You'll need to go back to the drawing board and explain why the death star cannot destroy a blackhole. Then it must be accepted on faith that a Dovin Basal's gravity well will behave in the same manner.
If you wish to assert that neutronium is real and exists within Sol, do so.
If you wish to contend against the existance of Hawking radiation, do so.
If not, spare us your worthless rhetoric.
Both star trek and star wars canon assert that neutronium is real. I don't have to assert their existence anymore than I have to assert the existence of the death star.
It's not my job to prove the existence of hawking radiation.
You spare me your worthless rhetoric and I'll spare you mine.
Quick question, darthy, when has our sun gone supernova? I'm just asking because you think our sun contains neutronium which is only theoretically found within neutron stars, which in turn are the remnants of stars that went supernova, stars with way more mass than our sun I might add.
Quick red hearing you mean. I was speaking hypothetically if pop science said neutronium existed on some of the crust of our sun, that Darth Tedious would not accept it then just repeat himself about RL neutronium not being the same as SW neutronium with there being no universal agreed upon definition of what neutronium is.

Darth Tedious, should I now assume that without any kind of thought prevoking reply in regards to the Dovin basal against the death star that you have conceded their defeat against it?
User avatar
Darth Tedious
Jedi Master
Posts: 1082
Joined: 2011-01-16 08:48pm

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by Darth Tedious »

You said earlier that the Death Star superlaser could destroy a black hole.

But we don't know. That much is true- we don't know for sure. The question of whether or not this is possible is in contention.

Both sides of the argument are contentious claims.

I have made an assertion, shown a scientific principle by which it could work, and provided evidence (regardless of how flimsy you feel that evidence is).

You refuse to assert your claim to the contrary. You have not given any explanation or scientific priciple to support a counterclaim, and have provided not one scrap of evidence.

You do not have to disprove my argument- you have to prove yours (if you are willing to own it).

Assert that the Death Star superlaser could destroy a black hole; explain how, in scientific principle, this could occur; provide evidence to support your case. If you are unwilling to do this, my assertion goes unchallenged.

'Maybe' is not a position from which you can debate. 'Maybe' is worthless in a debate. Saying that the Death Star could 'maybe' destroy a black hole neither proves that it could, nor disproves that it couldn't.

You've claimed that you can debunk anything I say- are you even willing to take up a contrary stance and try?

darthy wrote:Quick red hearing you mean.
Was this supposed to be a sentence? You make a personal attack against me, based on a spelling mistake in Latin, and then you butcher the English language with travesty such as this?
darthy wrote:I was speaking hypothetically if pop science said neutronium existed on some of the crust of our sun, that Darth Tedious would not accept it then just repeat himself about RL neutronium not being the same as SW neutronium with there being no universal agreed upon definition of what neutronium is.
You assume that that is what I would say. That is not the first time you have preempted an imagined argument on my part. This goes beyond strawman tactics- instead of taking something I have said and twisting it, you try to debunk something I haven't even said. It is pathetic.
darthy wrote:Darth Tedious, should I now assume that without any kind of thought prevoking reply in regards to the Dovin basal against the death star that you have conceded their defeat against it?
Assume what you will. You assumed the laws of physics would change in your favour to in order to disprove an argument I didn't even make. Everyone here can see exactly how realistic your assumptions are.
"Darth Tedious just showed why women can go anywhere they want because they are, in effect, mobile kitchens." - RazorOutlaw

"That could never happen because super computers." - Stark

"Don't go there girl! Talk to the VTOL cause the glass canopy ain't listening!" - Shroomy
darthy
Padawan Learner
Posts: 185
Joined: 2011-03-11 09:23am

Re: Fully Built Borg Assimilated Death Star II vs Star Wars

Post by darthy »

Darth Tedious wrote:You said earlier that the Death Star superlaser could destroy a black hole.

But we don't know. That much is true- we don't know for sure. The question of whether or not this is possible is in contention.

Both sides of the argument are contentious claims.

I have made an assertion, shown a scientific principle by which it could work, and provided evidence (regardless of how flimsy you feel that evidence is).

You refuse to assert your claim to the contrary. You have not given any explanation or scientific priciple to support a counterclaim, and have provided not one scrap of evidence.

You do not have to disprove my argument- you have to prove yours (if you are willing to own it).

Assert that the Death Star superlaser could destroy a black hole; explain how, in scientific principle, this could occur; provide evidence to support your case. If you are unwilling to do this, my assertion goes unchallenged.

'Maybe' is not a position from which you can debate. 'Maybe' is worthless in a debate. Saying that the Death Star could 'maybe' destroy a black hole neither proves that it could, nor disproves that it couldn't.

You've claimed that you can debunk anything I say- are you even willing to take up a contrary stance and try?

darthy wrote:Quick red hearing you mean.
Was this supposed to be a sentence? You make a personal attack against me, based on a spelling mistake in Latin, and then you butcher the English language with travesty such as this?
darthy wrote:I was speaking hypothetically if pop science said neutronium existed on some of the crust of our sun, that Darth Tedious would not accept it then just repeat himself about RL neutronium not being the same as SW neutronium with there being no universal agreed upon definition of what neutronium is.
You assume that that is what I would say. That is not the first time you have preempted an imagined argument on my part. This goes beyond strawman tactics- instead of taking something I have said and twisting it, you try to debunk something I haven't even said. It is pathetic.
darthy wrote:Darth Tedious, should I now assume that without any kind of thought prevoking reply in regards to the Dovin basal against the death star that you have conceded their defeat against it?
Assume what you will. You assumed the laws of physics would change in your favour to in order to disprove an argument I didn't even make. Everyone here can see exactly how realistic your assumptions are.
Poor man. I did make the claim that a Dovin Basal does not actually create a blackhole rather something that functions similar to it. Since we were talking about the Dovin Basal, that makes all this blackhole stuff a non-issue and unnecessary tangent in the discussion. Do you concede that the Dovin Basal would lose since you're unwilling to go back to them?
Post Reply