Phaser Momentum

[Darth Wong]

How does this prove that the two visible buttons on a phaser above the trigger are up/down instead of the left one being power level and the right one being beam width, as stated in the TM?

Why do you quote the TM, when it disproves your claim about a variable "push-particle" in the phaser by explicitly labeling the buttons and showing that none of them does the job you're asking them to do? If you're going to treat the TM as evidence, that's fine by me because it completely demolishes your argument. If I'd realized you would repeatedly treat the TM as evidence from the beginning, we could have skipped most of this argument since I could have simply cited its clear diagram of the control scheme and said "see? No control for altering the proportion of magical push-particles in the beam, and no mention of these push-particles or this magical push mechanism in the text either". Not to mention the monstrous violation of physics ...

Also, the scene with Data in TNG "Arsenal of Freedom" went directly from him saying he'd use wide angle, to him tapping buttons and firing. And if they can just open it up and tell it to do these things, doesn't that still mean the phaser can do these things without being altered?

Well, if we go by the TM's diagram and the use of a single button for power setting (which would be an ergonomic nightmare, but I'll concede that the Federation's ergonomics consultants are obviously idiots), then wide-beam is just the other button. Still no button for adjusting the proportion of the beam which is composed of these magical CoM-ignoring push-particles that are not mentioned anywhere in the literature or episodes.

Okay, I can try this. But you also seem to be unwilling to acknowledge any examples of a phaser pushing against a target at all.

Of course there are examples. A phaser has a slight recoil; you can see it when people fire them (particularly pulse phasers, which presumably release their energy over a shorter duration). It should strike objects with similar recoil. This is no different from a modern assault rifle. My problem is your assertion that it can magically create momentum in its target in excess of its own momentum.

I don't mean compression rifles fired nanoprobes, only that they were used (and can presumably say things about phaser bolt behavior based on what they do). The rifles I refer to as firing nanoprobes and backfiring were regular round-barrel rifles of the sort seen on DS9 and in the movies.

Technically speaking, you can push something with a laser as long as it's very light, and nanoprobes have almost no mass, so they could theoretically be pushed around as long as they aren't destroyed by the beam. While I still have doubts about the nature of this nanoprobe-firing (particularly since I've been elsewhere told that a crewman was hit by one of these nanoprobe-firing beams and was not affected by it, and there are some obvious physics concerns relating to the ionized path that they would presumably be using in conjunction with the low heat capacitance available to nanoscale objects), it's actually not impossible. The problem for you is that even if it's true, it does not actually support your theory over mine.

The lack of gravity was not the alien's doing. It was stated beforehand that the alien had damaged the section it was in so badly that gravity and life support were lost there. And if the slightest shove would push a mass-lightened alien, doesn't that still require some force from the phaser (or indirectly caused by it)?

No one ever said that a phaser exerts zero force. What was said is that a phaser cannot magically create more momentum upon collision than it possesses.

If you were a man, I would call you an asshole instead of a cunt. The difference is only about an inch or so.

It's actully about four inches in my case, according to Chelle and Jax. For which they and their tongues (and presumably noses) are grateful.

*whips out tape measure* I don't believe that. You would have to be 12 feet tall.

I searched your site for other examples of you calling someone a cunt or bitch, and found, IIRC, one example of the latter and none of the former. Have I earned a special place in your heart?

I've used "bitch" before. Just ask Axis Kast. As for the "cunt" bit, most of the flamers are men. As I said, the difference is (normally) only about an inch or so.

This wasn't an attempt to refute any point about phasers, only to flame Kernel. I was saying that nobody here kisses your ass, and you don't seem to want your ass kissed - you just want to win:

No, I just want to make people see that the popular "let's just throw all of physics out the window" approach is a stupid idea.

PS. Also, you did accuse people of kissing my ass, as anyone can see if they look through the posts. You have a habit of changing the story to avoid conceding a point; after all, this whole subject is just a diversion to avoid conceding your dead arguments on inertial-damper systems (you know, where you argued that it's impossible for a voltage fluctuation to cause a computer error?)

[Metrion Cascade]

How does this prove that the two visible buttons on a phaser above the trigger are up/down instead of the left one being power level and the right one being beam width, as stated in the TM? It looks like (from your description) the power setting just increases every time the power button is hit, and would either start decreasing once you got to the max power and kept going, or start at the lowest setting again.

Also, the scene with Data in TNG "Arsenal of Freedom" went directly from him saying he'd use wide angle, to him tapping buttons and firing. And if they can just open it up and tell it to do these things, doesn't that still mean the phaser can do these things without being altered?

Has it occurred to either of you that the trigger button may have a soft touch setting to widen the beam angle? Ever used a camera before where you hold the button softly to chage the focus, then push the button to take the picture? Same concept and it works with existing models of the phaser.

While Starfleet may actually be that stupid, the TM does show a separate beam width button (picture forthcoming). But can you imagine Riker accidentally pressing too hard and killing both Yuta and her target?

[Metrion Cascade]

Dropping the civility requires there to have been civility. There never was, which is fine. God knows I hate acting polite when it's not justified.

Then don't whine when you receive insults for insults, bitch. You spend a great deal of time castigating people for their conduct; I don't recall anyone electing you to the position of board Nanny.

I flame people who act like weasels in arguments, and you have clearly fallen into that category here, particularly when you pulled that shit about acting as though I was running away from a fight because I didn't feel your rebuttal was good enough to warrant spending more time on the other debate. Dogging somebody from thread to thread in an attempt to embarrass him is against our board rules and it is against the rules of conduct in most boards, yet you seem to act as though it is a perfectly nice thing to do, and then try to act hurt and offended when I react to it.

Stick to the thread topic? Okay. But how should I deal with points that are made in one thread that are relevant to another one?

Got a screen capture? The only one I can find doesn't show the controls very well or what each button does. But the TM does. And how do you propose Data fired his wide-angle shot? Willpower?

The TM shows three buttons: two of them are obviously power-up and power-down buttons, as we could see Riker's thumb depressing one button continuously while the power LED rose to max. The third button's function is unknown, but since they already need other abilities, such as the ability to switch a phaser to wide-beam, it is highly doubtful that there is room for the kind of complex control scheme that you envision. How would you make it understand this "modify component of phaser beam which contains magical conservation-of-momentum-ignoring push particles" control that you think is on there, when there simply aren't enough buttons for that job?

I'm not saying the user directly sets these ratios (and I again concede the conservation of momentum point). I'm saying that each setting already has different ratios depending on its function. And...are you conceding that there is a beam width control that doesn't require modification? Good. From the TNG tech manual:
TM picture

And your interpretation? Still don't have one? Here's mine: phasers are multiple devices.

Here's mine: phasers can be heavily modified. Mine has the benefit of not requiring magic mind-reading buttons on phasers where a single button can give it 5 different instructions.

My TV remote can change channels with a single button without me typing in CNN, NBC, etc. A similar idea apparently applies to the beam intensity and beam width buttons. And has anyone figured out what those damned beeps are supposed to mean?

But not any interest in knowing about the source material. On the one hand you claim to have an "extensive canon database," and on the other you laugh at people who actually watch the show.

I laugh at people who watch Voyager, because Voyager sucks. I also laugh at people who obviously know more about Star Trek science than they do about real science. There is a clear delineation in this little "Star Trek fan community" between people who know real science and people who know Trek science, and it's obvious which side of that wall you happen to live on.

Jesus, I think Janeway should have been brought up on charges and I still saw most of that season. You don't have to watch it. But you act as if you have all the information you need anyway.

I have enough information to see that you were lying when you said that Voyager fired nanoprobes through its phasers in Scorpion Part II, so I see no reason to take any of your claims at face value now.

No, I was wrong about "Scorpion, Part II" and I admitted I was wrong. You can still ask fifty other people here about the nanoprobes and backfiring based on other episodes.

If you had a history of being honest, I might not react this way. But your history is that of a bullshitter. Present the screenshots you claim to have, and then we'll talk more. As it is, I've run into a lot of people who made a lot of screwy claims about Treknology based on their recollection of episodes, and I've seen those claims fall down upon closer examination enough times that I'm not particularly interested in this one until you present some evidence besides your demonstrably unreliable personal word.

Me being wrong about an episode is about as much ground to call me a liar, as you being wrong about phasers having to be modified to fire wide-angle beams is to call you one. I only assume you made an honest mistake.

Do you think there's material eruption? Because as it sits right now, I see three options that don't make sense to me either:

- phasers flat-out violate conservation of momentum with an energy beam that exerts force

If it doesn't make sense to you, then why do you propose it as the most reasonable theory?

I have conceded the conservation of momentum point. And I'm not saying it's the most reasonable theory. I'm asking for different theories than the three listed here.

- phasers somehow eject mass in two directions without us seeing the compensating ejecta

Invisible or not, they would feel it if they happen to have its ass-end pointing at them.

- or they have a treknobabble internal thruster that doesn't eject anything (more CofM ramifications)

A thruster which doesn't eject anything is an oxymoron. What the fuck have you been smoking?

Hence the term "treknobabble." I also, in the above quote, immediately explained why this didn't make sense to me.

Once again, phasers do not have more push-power with more firepower. The recoil is light, and insufficient to throw people around, which is why it usually does not. The few incidents of high-force acceleration take place under anomalous conditions (a floating alien is not a normal situation; for all you know, a BB gun would have sent it flying too).

A BB has momentum. Why is there any recoil at all if NO push is being generated? And I never said there was more push at higher settings. I said there was less (by design, not because of a user setting).

And as long as you're quoting the TM, it does not describe any of this bullshit push-particle nonsense you're talking about, nor does it describe special adjustments for this phenomenon; the only beam settings it describes are 16 levels of power adjustment. Any other adjustment is presumably related to beam geometry rather than nature.

I never said the user directly adjusts the proportion of this particle or that. I said each intensity setting has different preset proportions. And precisely what aspects of phaser function does the TNG TM describe? It says nothing at all about TNG movie-era or VOY rifles, unless you have a later TM for DS9 or VOY that does.

You want plain insults instead of proper sarcasm? Okay...not used to this, but I'll try. You're...a big fat doodiehead! There. Not really my thing, but there you have it. </third grade>

You're obviously much more comfortable with snide remarks rather than direct insults. It's pretty clear what your tactics are.

What's so strange about a person using sarcasm instead of expletives that simply aren't me? If someone pisses me off IRL, I get sarcastic too. I enjoy it. I don't enjoy simply cursing people out, because it doesn't get my point across and is less fun. And it just doesn't sound natural. AND the last damned thing I need is to fall into the "ghetto sistah" stereotype. No. None of that.

Example: if someone disagrees with me on MGM, calling them an asshole only demonstrates that I'm angry. Calling them a pedophile or rapist, on the other hand, is an insult specific to their position, and one that equates their position with something they're likely to hate by their own standards.

Here's a novel fucking idea. I was wrong about one episode having the rifles. You can still watch "Prey," which does feature the rifle doing the same. The point stands.

How?

Assuming that I'm telling the truth (you can check) about "Prey," it proves that, in accordance with my point, the round-barrel phaser rifle fired Borg nanoprobes, and that (interpret it as you see fit), the alien floated back when hit.

I bet you're not even having fun. All pissed off, red in the face, banging on your desk.

Interesting how you spend so much time speculating on my personal feelings. More obvious projection, I'm afraid. You spend all this time complaining that I'm a bad person, talking about my character, complaining about my conduct, speculating about my emotional state, and then you think that I'm the one taking this too personally because I toss off some zero-effort insults like "bitch" at you? Take a good look in the mirror.

I'm laughing at a silly diversion, while you're having a coronary trying to defend your faith in the Empire, Federation stupidity, and your own omniscience. I'd say there's a valid activity there, if you're enjoying yourself. But you're not.

You're amusing me, and I'm effortlessly pissing you off (you could be having fun too). I wish the junkies I went to school with had been so easy to fuck with. I'm laughing at the superior intellect, Khan.

I love the way you obviously put so much effort into making these long-winded clever little put-downs of yours, and then act as though I must be going berserk at my keyboard if I respond with a lazy insult like "bitch". But go ahead, continue to project your own behaviour onto me. I'm sure it makes you feel better.

Actually it doesn't take much effort at all, since I'm sarcastic as hell 24/7, much to the amusement (and concern) of those who know me. You'd really have to see it to believe how readily I come up with this shit.

<animated neon sign> And remember, lest you flame me about the conservation of momentum point again - I concede that no massless particle imparts momentum. </animated neon sign>

[Metrion Cascade]

How does this prove that the two visible buttons on a phaser above the trigger are up/down instead of the left one being power level and the right one being beam width, as stated in the TM?

Why do you quote the TM, when it disproves your claim about a variable "push-particle" in the phaser by explicitly labeling the buttons and showing that none of them does the job you're asking them to do? If you're going to treat the TM as evidence, that's fine by me because it completely demolishes your argument. If I'd realized you would repeatedly treat the TM as evidence from the beginning, we could have skipped most of this argument since I could have simply cited its clear diagram of the control scheme and said "see? No control for altering the proportion of magical push-particles in the beam, and no mention of these push-particles or this magical push mechanism in the text either". Not to mention the monstrous violation of physics ...

I already conceded the conservation of momentum point. And I never said the user directly sets the proportion of whatever pushes the target. I said it was a preset proportion depending on the power setting.

Also, the scene with Data in TNG "Arsenal of Freedom" went directly from him saying he'd use wide angle, to him tapping buttons and firing. And if they can just open it up and tell it to do these things, doesn't that still mean the phaser can do these things without being altered?

Well, if we go by the TM's diagram and the use of a single button for power setting (which would be an ergonomic nightmare, but I'll concede that the Federation's ergonomics consultants are obviously idiots), then wide-beam is just the other button. Still no button for adjusting the proportion of the beam which is composed of these magical CoM-ignoring push-particles that are not mentioned anywhere in the literature or episodes.

Never proposed such a button.

Okay, I can try this. But you also seem to be unwilling to acknowledge any examples of a phaser pushing against a target at all.

Of course there are examples. A phaser has a slight recoil; you can see it when people fire them (particularly pulse phasers, which presumably release their energy over a shorter duration). It should strike objects with similar recoil. This is no different from a modern assault rifle. My problem is your assertion that it can magically create momentum in its target in excess of its own momentum.

Already conceded.

I don't mean compression rifles fired nanoprobes, only that they were used (and can presumably say things about phaser bolt behavior based on what they do). The rifles I refer to as firing nanoprobes and backfiring were regular round-barrel rifles of the sort seen on DS9 and in the movies.

Technically speaking, you can push something with a laser as long as it's very light, and nanoprobes have almost no mass, so they could theoretically be pushed around as long as they aren't destroyed by the beam. While I still have doubts about the nature of this nanoprobe-firing (particularly since I've been elsewhere told that a crewman was hit by one of these nanoprobe-firing beams and was not affected by it, and there are some obvious physics concerns relating to the ionized path that they would presumably be using in conjunction with the low heat capacitance available to nanoscale objects), it's actually not impossible. The problem for you is that even if it's true, it does not actually support your theory over mine.

Wouldn't you need a different mechanism (I'm proposing multiple mechanisms) to move nanoprobes than to heat things or "phase" them out? I'm not familiar with the nanoprobes hitting a person, but they were supposedly programmed specifically to attack Species 8472, so maybe they just sat on their asses once inside the crewman. Then again, with any phaser hit he'd end up in sickbay at least for a checkup. Maybe they were removed or deactivated there?

The lack of gravity was not the alien's doing. It was stated beforehand that the alien had damaged the section it was in so badly that gravity and life support were lost there. And if the slightest shove would push a mass-lightened alien, doesn't that still require some force from the phaser (or indirectly caused by it)?

No one ever said that a phaser exerts zero force. What was said is that a phaser cannot magically create more momentum upon collision than it possesses.

Conceded.

If you were a man, I would call you an asshole instead of a cunt. The difference is only about an inch or so.

It's actully about four inches in my case, according to Chelle and Jax. For which they and their tongues (and presumably noses) are grateful.

*whips out tape measure* I don't believe that. You would have to be 12 feet tall.

lmao...close. But I've seen girls in porno with variously sized perinea. I'll have to have one of them take a ruler next time. (putting light on head before I step out, lest planes hit me)

I searched your site for other examples of you calling someone a cunt or bitch, and found, IIRC, one example of the latter and none of the former. Have I earned a special place in your heart?

I've used "bitch" before. Just ask Axis Kast. As for the "cunt" bit, most of the flamers are men. As I said, the difference is (normally) only about an inch or so.

This wasn't an attempt to refute any point about phasers, only to flame Kernel. I was saying that nobody here kisses your ass, and you don't seem to want your ass kissed - you just want to win:

No, I just want to make people see that the popular "let's just throw all of physics out the window" approach is a stupid idea.

PS. Also, you did accuse people of kissing my ass, as anyone can see if they look through the posts. You have a habit of changing the story to avoid conceding a point; after all, this whole subject is just a diversion to avoid conceding your dead arguments on inertial-damper systems (you know, where you argued that it's impossible for a voltage fluctuation to cause a computer error?)

Oh, yeah. I did, on page 3. Conceded - I really do think your ass is covered with lipstick.

And what have I said on this thread that has anything to do with the IDF? The only points in the Vader/Cube thread that have any possible bearing here are those dealing with phasers.

And you've avoided concessions too. On this thread:

So. You said hand phasers only have up/down controls. This is contradicted by onscreen events and the Technical Manual. But that's irrelevant.

No, it's clearly visible when Riker kills Yuta. Get a pair of glasses.

- followed by:

The TM shows three buttons: two of them are obviously power-up and power-down buttons, as we could see Riker's thumb depressing one button continuously while the power LED rose to max.

- finally:

Well, if we go by the TM's diagram and the use of a single button for power setting (which would be an ergonomic nightmare, but I'll concede that the Federation's ergonomics consultants are obviously idiots), then wide-beam is just the other button.

Hold on a second - you've got the TM and looked at the same layout I did and (in bold) said it depicts power-up/power-down buttons despite the fact they're labeled as "beam intensity" and "beam width?"

[Darth Wong]

I already conceded the conservation of momentum point. And I never said the user directly sets the proportion of whatever pushes the target. I said it was a preset proportion depending on the power setting.

Yes you did, when I pointed out that phasers on stun seem just as like to give a big shove as phasers on kill. That was your evasion, now you're saying you never meant that at all. Sorry, but the point remains: phasers do not shove harder when the power level is increased, therefore the "shove" effect is obviously inconsistent, therefore it's probably due to something other than an intrinsic characteristic of the beam.

Wouldn't you need a different mechanism (I'm proposing multiple mechanisms) to move nanoprobes than to heat things or "phase" them out?

Sure you would, but it wouldn't be that hard to jury-rig if you're creative. All you'd need is a tiny feeder-line running in the barrel (which is much wider than the phaser beam, so there's probably room) and a small compressed CO2 tank near the back. Just wire the valve to the trigger and you can shoot nanoprobes out the end. The phaser beam is probably set to heat a path of air to the target to lower air resistance so the nanoprobes won't spray too much.

When someone can think up a solution using mundane real-world technologies in 30 seconds, it's pretty clear that there's no justification for inventing new technobabble phenomena in order to explain it.

I'm not familiar with the nanoprobes hitting a person, but they were supposedly programmed specifically to attack Species 8472, so maybe they just sat on their asses once inside the crewman. Then again, with any phaser hit he'd end up in sickbay at least for a checkup. Maybe they were removed or deactivated there?

Or maybe most of the nanoprobes strayed out of the beam, since we know now that they're harmless to humans.

lmao...close. But I've seen girls in porno with variously sized perinea. I'll have to have one of them take a ruler next time. (putting light on head before I step out, lest planes hit me)

I still think that figure is way out.

Oh, yeah. I did, on page 3. Conceded - I really do think your ass is covered with lipstick.

Not when people think I'm wrong about something. I've gotten in flamewars with enough people on this board for that to be obvious. People who whine about others kissing my ass are engaging in an obvious attempt to attack the motives of anyone who dares agree with me.

And what have I said on this thread that has anything to do with the IDF? The only points in the Vader/Cube thread that have any possible bearing here are those dealing with phasers.

My point was that the whole phaser-momentum idea which you've finally conceded was concocted as a way of evading a rebuttal to your inertial-damper theories in the Vader/Cube thread.

And you've avoided concessions too. On this thread:

So. You said hand phasers only have up/down controls. This is contradicted by onscreen events and the Technical Manual. But that's irrelevant.

No, it's clearly visible when Riker kills Yuta. Get a pair of glasses.

- followed by:

The TM shows three buttons: two of them are obviously power-up and power-down buttons, as we could see Riker's thumb depressing one button continuously while the power LED rose to max.

- finally:

Well, if we go by the TM's diagram and the use of a single button for power setting (which would be an ergonomic nightmare, but I'll concede that the Federation's ergonomics consultants are obviously idiots), then wide-beam is just the other button.

Hold on a second - you've got the TM and looked at the same layout I did and (in bold) said it depicts power-up/power-down buttons despite the fact they're labeled as "beam intensity" and "beam width?"

News flash: the TM is not canon, and I thought it made more ergonomic sense for the two buttons to be up/down power buttons. As I said already, if I'd known from the start that you were going to treat the TM as canon, then we wouldn't have had to bother with half of this argument.

[Metrion Cascade]

I already conceded the conservation of momentum point. And I never said the user directly sets the proportion of whatever pushes the target. I said it was a preset proportion depending on the power setting.

Yes you did, when I pointed out that phasers on stun seem just as like to give a big shove as phasers on kill. That was your evasion, now you're saying you never meant that at all. Sorry, but the point remains: phasers do not shove harder when the power level is increased, therefore the "shove" effect is obviously inconsistent, therefore it's probably due to something other than an intrinsic characteristic of the beam.

Non sequitur. The push changes depending on the power level. And please quote where I said that the push was directly proportional to the intensity.

Wouldn't you need a different mechanism (I'm proposing multiple mechanisms) to move nanoprobes than to heat things or "phase" them out?

Sure you would, but it wouldn't be that hard to jury-rig if you're creative. All you'd need is a tiny feeder-line running in the barrel (which is much wider than the phaser beam, so there's probably room) and a small compressed CO2 tank near the back. Just wire the valve to the trigger and you can shoot nanoprobes out the end. The phaser beam is probably set to heat a path of air to the target to lower air resistance so the nanoprobes won't spray too much.

When someone can think up a solution using mundane real-world technologies in 30 seconds, it's pretty clear that there's no justification for inventing new technobabble phenomena in order to explain it.

IIRC, the scene in "Prey" involved pulses, not a beam. How would the nanoprobes' delivery be aided by pulses? I still think a canister or dart would have been simpler if this required much modification of a phaser, but this is Starfleet...

I'm not familiar with the nanoprobes hitting a person, but they were supposedly programmed specifically to attack Species 8472, so maybe they just sat on their asses once inside the crewman. Then again, with any phaser hit he'd end up in sickbay at least for a checkup. Maybe they were removed or deactivated there?

Or maybe most of the nanoprobes strayed out of the beam, since we know now that they're harmless to humans.

But if they're that hard to deliver by phaser, would they work as well against Species 8472?

lmao...close. But I've seen girls in porno with variously sized perinea. I'll have to have one of them take a ruler next time. (putting light on head before I step out, lest planes hit me)

I still think that figure is way out.

Oh, yeah. I did, on page 3. Conceded - I really do think your ass is covered with lipstick.

Not when people think I'm wrong about something. I've gotten in flamewars with enough people on this board for that to be obvious. People who whine about others kissing my ass are engaging in an obvious attempt to attack the motives of anyone who dares agree with me.

You do have a policy on the "me too" tactic. When Kernel first showed up, he didn't seem to have read the thread. There were a few one-line responses that had nothing to do with the topic. And I did think he was brown nosing.

And what have I said on this thread that has anything to do with the IDF? The only points in the Vader/Cube thread that have any possible bearing here are those dealing with phasers.

My point was that the whole phaser-momentum idea which you've finally conceded was concocted as a way of evading a rebuttal to your inertial-damper theories in the Vader/Cube thread.

LMAO! I came up with the (since conceded, remember) magical push particle well before the IDF argument started.

And you've avoided concessions too. On this thread:

No, it's clearly visible when Riker kills Yuta. Get a pair of glasses.

- followed by:

The TM shows three buttons: two of them are obviously power-up and power-down buttons, as we could see Riker's thumb depressing one button continuously while the power LED rose to max.

- finally:

Well, if we go by the TM's diagram and the use of a single button for power setting (which would be an ergonomic nightmare, but I'll concede that the Federation's ergonomics consultants are obviously idiots), then wide-beam is just the other button.

Hold on a second - you've got the TM and looked at the same layout I did and (in bold) said it depicts power-up/power-down buttons despite the fact they're labeled as "beam intensity" and "beam width?"

News flash: the TM is not canon, and I thought it made more ergonomic sense for the two buttons to be up/down power buttons. As I said already, if I'd known from the start that you were going to treat the TM as canon, then we wouldn't have had to bother with half of this argument.

My point was that you yourself pointed to the TM, and said it shows up/down controls when it doesn't. You didn't say they were up/down just because of the Yuta scene. You said the TM showed up/down controls.

[Darth Wong]

Yes you did, when I pointed out that phasers on stun seem just as like to give a big shove as phasers on kill. That was your evasion, now you're saying you never meant that at all. Sorry, but the point remains: phasers do not shove harder when the power level is increased, therefore the "shove" effect is obviously inconsistent, therefore it's probably due to something other than an intrinsic characteristic of the beam.

Non sequitur. The push changes depending on the power level. And please quote where I said that the push was directly proportional to the intensity.

I'm going to say this very slowly, because you're obviously not getting it. If the push is dependent on power level, then your theory is inconsistent with observation, which shows unpredictable movement in reaction to being hit, and no correlation between power level and this "push" of yours.

IIRC, the scene in "Prey" involved pulses, not a beam. How would the nanoprobes' delivery be aided by pulses? I still think a canister or dart would have been simpler if this required much modification of a phaser, but this is Starfleet...

Obviously. But a pulse will ionize air just as readily as a continuous beam.

But if they're that hard to deliver by phaser, would they work as well against Species 8472?

Shooting them out of a phaser is the dumbest idea that I've ever heard of, and so it's no surprise that it would occur on Voyager. Besides, I recall from "Prey" that they never actually fired this thing at the S-8472, and there was no demonstration of its effectiveness. For all you know, it didn't work at all.

You do have a policy on the "me too" tactic. When Kernel first showed up, he didn't seem to have read the thread. There were a few one-line responses that had nothing to do with the topic. And I did think he was brown nosing.

Me-too posts are typically one-liners consisting of almost no effort. Kernel made long posts and made points. Now you're just trying to pretend that if you don't think he does a good enough job debating, then he's broken the rules. Is there any criticism which you don't promptly try to deflect onto somebody else with the Tu Quoque fallacy?

LMAO! I came up with the (since conceded, remember) magical push particle well before the IDF argument started.

For no reason, in a thread about overcoming Borg defenses?

My point was that you yourself pointed to the TM, and said it shows up/down controls when it doesn't.

I pointed to the TM which contained a reasonably accurate drawing of a phaser. I did not (and do not) agree with many of the TM's technical claims.

You didn't say they were up/down just because of the Yuta scene. You said the TM showed up/down controls.

The TM shows controls which make more sense as up/down controls than anything else. However, if you accept its technical claims, they are up/down and width controls. Either way, they do NOT support your claims that they have controls which can adjust the proportion of the beam which contains this magical push-particle.

Now you are simply resorting to nitpicks, trying to find some meaningless fault in an opponent's argument even though it has nothing to do with any point being made solely for the sake of trying to win ... something.