Useless Treknology

[Crossover_Maniac]

From my own canon database, it is obvious that virtually all Treknology would be useless against SW ships. Seriously. Phasers, transporters, sensors, communications, even phase-cloaks and subspace transporters ... all useless.

Consider the facts: Treknology is heavily dependent upon "subspace". We don't know exactly what subspace is, but we can gather from observation that subspace is a phenomenon which makes energy and matter less interactive with the normal universe, thus allowing sensor beams and even physical objects to pass through solid barriers.
We know from TNG (see my database) that subspace sensors can scan through rock, but not through actinides (ie- heavy metals), as well as a variety of other high-density metals. This is no small matter; in fact, it is huge. You see, virtually all Treknology is dependent upon subspace. And subspace is important because matter or energy in subspace can pass through solid objects (energy more easily than matter, hence the dangers of the subspace transporter).

This is why a subspace transporter can put a man in the middle of the Enterprise-D's reactor room. This is why a regular transporter can do the same if it is not stymied by shields or electrical storms or any of the other myriad potential problems. This is why their sensors can scan objects through a kilometre of solid rock. This is why a subspace-phased ship can pass through rock.

But there's a downside, boys and girls: what if your opponent uses a warship which is entirely cladded with heavy metals or worse yet, an exotic material which is impregnated with a superdense material such as neutronium? Since the magical penetrative characteristics of subspace are useless against heavy metals, it seems likely that any and all subspace-related technologies are useless too.

Yeah, but Fed ships are made of metal, and they beam in and out of it all of the time. As for phase cloaks, the Romulian that was phased cloaked with La Forge and Ensign Ro managed to phase through the ship hull. So, there is some use for subspace tech for metals.

[DarkStar]

ST Neutronium.

Very dense.
Metallic(most of hte time)

When was Star Trek neutronium a metal?

Iconian structure, Iconian gateways, the Think Tank ship all displayed metallic properties. Next victim please....

The Iconian structure did not look like metal. As I recall, it was not unlike some sort of stone. But, then, the idea was that the internal structure was neutronium, so that doesn't help.

The gateway and building from Contagion were never said to be neutronium. They look like this: http://canadian.deepspace93.com/Iconia.html

Dr. Paul Stubbs was studying the decay rate of neutronium from a neutron star blast in "Evolution"[TNG]. Sounds like real neutronium to me.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I love the Trekkie 'SW Neutronium Iz BAD!' chant.

Witness the facts, folks.

SW Neutronium:

Very dense.
Metallic.
Useful as armour.
Can be mixed with other things.

ST Neutronium.

Very dense.
Metallic(most of hte time).
Useful as armour.. Negates Starfleet weapons entirely!
Can be mixed with other things.




Hrrrrrrrrrrrm. Pretty damning evidence, I'd say. They do the exact same stuff. Granted, neither are from Neutron Stars, but the shoes fit...

In the DS9 episode in which Sisko and Co. team up with Dominion soldiers to eliminate some rogues Sisko asks if they could simply use QTorp against the base and O'Brian says that since the base is made out of neutronium they couldn't be sure if the gateway was destroyed. This indicates that QTorp do have an effect on neutronium but how much is unknown.

[SirNitram]

Sith: Conceeded on the point of Q-torp usage against Neutronium.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Did it occur to you how silly that was while you were saying it? You do realize that you're claiming the windowed areas are significantly weaker, right? And that therefore the Empire knowingly puts all of its highest ranking officers in the least protected parts of the ship?

If you were talking A-wing vs. Bridge window, that's one thing. That, I can understand.

Fire a 12 inch shot at the armour of an Iowa. Watch it bounce off. Now fire it at the window of the bridge. Guess what happens.


BTW, not all the bridge was destroyed.
http://supreme_sheridan.tripod.com/aotc_ics_vs_tesb.html#damage

[Vitamea]

Quote

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire a 12 inch shot at the armour of an Iowa. Watch it bounce off. Now fire it at the window of the bridge. Guess what happens.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not getting in the neutronium argument here but just FYI, the Iowa and other battleships have this thing called a Conning Tower. Its an armoured area where the officers go to during a gunfight. Its armoured as heavily as the main belt.

[Darth Wong]

Yeah, but Fed ships are made of metal, and they beam in and out of it all of the time. As for phase cloaks, the Romulian that was phased cloaked with La Forge and Ensign Ro managed to phase through the ship hull. So, there is some use for subspace tech for metals.

You can't seriously be this stupid. Listen very carefully: all heavy metals are metals, but not all metals are necessarily heavy metals. Look up logical fallacies of composition sometime: the characteristics of any metal cannot be used to disprove arguments specifically regarding heavy metals.

I say again: phase-cloaks, subspace transporters, regular transporters, sensors, and communications: all useless against heavy metals. If you want to disprove that, stop bullshitting or making an ass out of yourself with moronic logical fallacies, and find me an example of subspace technology being effective through heavy metals.

As for neutronium (a typical red-herring nitpick since the original point does not depend on it; ordinary depleted uranium will do the trick), Star Wars neutronium does not claim to be "solid neutronium". It is described as a metallic matrix impregnated with neutronium, which is consistent with its appearance. Star Trek neutronium on the other hand, is obviously not true neutronium because it claims solid non-spherical shapes, and neutronium does not form any shape but a sphere. Solid rectangular shapes are the result of electromagnetic binding configurations, which are inapplicable to neutronium because neutronium is electrically neutral. Moreover, electromagnetism is much weaker than the nuclear binding force.

Of course, if you would like to debate this properly, via E-mail, you can always risk the Imperial SmackDown(TM) ...

[Singular Quartet]

As for neutronium (a typical red-herring nitpick since the original point does not depend on it; ordinary depleted uranium will do the trick), Star Wars neutronium does not claim to be "solid neutronium". It is described as a metallic matrix impregnated with neutronium, which is consistent with its appearance. Star Trek neutronium on the other hand, is obviously not true neutronium because it claims solid non-spherical shapes, and neutronium does not form any shape but a sphere. Solid rectangular shapes are the result of electromagnetic binding configurations, which are inapplicable to neutronium because neutronium is electrically neutral. Moreover, electromagnetism is much weaker than the nuclear binding force.

Oh, good. When I used Neutronium in my ideas, I had it keep its shape using all-powerful gravitation feilds.

Of course, if you would like to debate this properly, via E-mail, you can always risk the Imperial SmackDown(TM) ...

I smell roasted Troll.... oh, wait, that's the residue from the Hate-mail page. Crossover Maniac, don't do it.

[TheDarkling]

See I said I had seen that idea before. ^^^^

[Cpt_Frank]

I say again: phase-cloaks, subspace transporters, regular transporters, sensors, and communications: all useless against heavy metals. If you want to disprove that, stop bullshitting or making an ass out of yourself with moronic logical fallacies, and find me an example of subspace technology being effective through heavy metals.

I believe you should add a note about the subspace transporter to the federation special tech page, mylord.
Adding it to the page will prevent trekkies from using it as a cop-out.

[TheDarkling]

Even if Heavy metals do block the subspace transporter its still useful to the Feds in a war especially an offensive one (Not that they could destroy more than a few planets and not that they would).

I simply pointed out that it could be a problem for the Imps and wondered why it wasnt on the special tech page.

[Cpt_Frank]

But how could they destroy whole planets with a mere transporter?
Beam bombs into the core??? Where all the heavy transporter-affecting heavy metals are located?
And do you know how BIG a planet is? Do you know how much energy you need to blow a planet up? Or to only devastate it's surface?
You'd need to beam a lot of bombs onto that planet!

[SirNitram]

But how could they destroy whole planets with a mere transporter?
Beam bombs into the core??? Where all the heavy transporter-affecting heavy metals are located?
And do you know how BIG a planet is? Do you know how much energy you need to blow a planet up? Or to only devastate it's surface?
You'd need to beam a lot of bombs onto that planet!

Do not delve into this path of madness, this one will surely drive you mad(Or at least drive you to play some Star Wars: Rebellion, and blow up the entire Rim with five Death Stars).

[Cpt_Frank]

That's quite actually what I always do when playing Rebellion!

[Singular Quartet]

Even if Heavy metals do block the subspace transporter its still useful to the Feds in a war especially an offensive one (Not that they could destroy more than a few planets and not that they would).

Huh, what?

[Darth Yoshi]

Uhh doesn't the federation have something that can scan through neutronium? I think I recall hearing that the feds determine something is "solid neutronium" which implies they can scan through it.

Being able to tell what something is doesn't mean you can scan through it. You might, but it's not a warranted assumption.

[Cpt_Frank]

Even if Heavy metals do block the subspace transporter its still useful to the Feds in a war especially an offensive one (Not that they could destroy more than a few planets and not that they would).

Huh, what?

That's what I thought, too.

[SirNitram]

That's quite actually what I always do when playing Rebellion!

... Oh. Well. Carry on the good work, Captain Frank!

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Transporters. Kill. Planets. Not.

[une]

So if I'm to understand Star Wars neutronium corrrectly, it's essentially like an ice tray, where instead of the spaces being filled with ice they are filled with neutronium.

Am I getting it right?


<edit>That's going by Mr. Wong's explanation by the way.

[TheDarkling]

Who said blow up a planet - the Feds dont have that kind of power but a few megatons per torp means you could do a nice bit of damage to key population centers and industrial facilities.

Also you could simple blow up the planetary shield then commence with normal bombardment.

Just because heavy metals may stop it doesnt mean its useless.
Simply as a long range torp delivery system its useful and once the shield around the bridge is down simple beam a few in there where the armour is weak - I have seen calcs putting it between -50% and 66% of Federation armor strength so that shouldnt be a problem and according to the ESB novel the ship was completeley destroyed by the impact.

[une]

It wasn't destroyed in the film though. If I remember it correctly, you can clearly see that the ship is still there after the asteroid collision. It's bridge is shooting out flames and such, but that's about the extent of the damage.

[DarkStar]

Did it occur to you how silly that was while you were saying it? You do realize that you're claiming the windowed areas are significantly weaker, right? And that therefore the Empire knowingly puts all of its highest ranking officers in the least protected parts of the ship?

If you were talking A-wing vs. Bridge window, that's one thing. That, I can understand.

Fire a 12 inch shot at the armour of an Iowa. Watch it bounce off. Now fire it at the window of the bridge. Guess what happens.


BTW, not all the bridge was destroyed.
http://supreme_sheridan.tripod.com/aotc_ics_vs_tesb.html#damage

1. You're still being silly, because we're not talking about the windows themselves. Your claim is that the entire sections of hull involving windows are weak.

2. That page is crap. If you watch the movie and look at the orange glow before the ISD obscures the view, it looks just like the sections with all the loud red arrows.

[TheDarkling]

une: Heres how I see it, if Im wrong on anything please correct because unlike some people here Im actually interested in looking at all evidence.

1. As we switch from the scene theres still a glow at the bottom of the screen implying explosions may still be going on.
2. Since the book says it and the film doesnt contradict it then we assume it was destroyed - prehaps by secondary explosions but still losing the bridge seems critical.
3. We dont see a bridge-less ship again in the movie. This last piece is a bit weak but it still adds some evidence.

If im wrong on any of these points could someone out me to evidence indicating otherwise.

Thanks.

[Crossover_Maniac]

Yeah, but Fed ships are made of metal, and they beam in and out of it all of the time. As for phase cloaks, the Romulian that was phased cloaked with La Forge and Ensign Ro managed to phase through the ship hull. So, there is some use for subspace tech for metals.

You can't seriously be this stupid. Listen very carefully: all heavy metals are metals, but not all metals are necessarily heavy metals. Look up logical fallacies of composition sometime: the characteristics of any metal cannot be used to disprove arguments specifically regarding heavy metals.

I say again: phase-cloaks, subspace transporters, regular transporters, sensors, and communications: all useless against heavy metals. If you want to disprove that, stop bullshitting or making an ass out of yourself with moronic logical fallacies, and find me an example of subspace technology being effective through heavy metals.

Transporters were stopped by 2 kilometers of granite. Density of granite=2600 kg/m^3, now compare that to a low density metal like aluminum (2700 kg/m^3). You're right. Subspace tech is crap.