A way ST forces could win a battle with the Empire

[Batman]

You are grasping for straws to explain the obvious. You seek canon evidence of ST tech acting upon SW tech? No such thing exists because they are different franchises. If they did, the debate forums would be empty.

Which means you can't blithely assume they would. You get to assume either side's tech does what we see in the canon, nothing more.

Secondly, you arguement undermines any sort of comparison.

It most certainly does not. Incidentally, there's only one e in argument.

How do we know hyperspace exists in the ST galaxy?

We don't, but for the purpose of the debate, we assume it does.

How do we know how turbolasers would interact with ST shields.

That'd be the part where we see both sides shields interact with inert matter or firepower of a given yield and go from there.

Once you go down this road of refusing to compare any tech till we see it in action you have destroyed all the tools for any vs debates and you might as well only visit the Starwars forum and stay away from this one.

I'm willing to compare all right. I'm not willing to assume that 'well, since both are called shields, and since they seem to do roughly the same thing other than the 5 orders of magnitude resilience difference, they work the same way'.

So direct observations:
1. ST and SW cloak makes the ship invisible to the eye

Aaand...fail. The cloak used by Thrawn in HTTE didn't render the ship invisible, it just prevented the NR from scanning the freighter's cargo hold until it was too late.

2. ST and SW cloak make strange rippling effects when the decloak

I'm not entirely sure how that is relevant especially as we only ever saw one type of cloak decloak in Star Wars.

3. ST and SW cloaked ships don't fire while cloak (for the most part)

Trek ships can't for the most part. Wars ships []don't[/i]. That's not the same thing.

4. ST and SW cloaked ships can't be detected till they uncloak.

Trek cloaked ships are detected (if not necessarily pinpointed) all the damned time, and the very existance of the Crystal Gravfield Trap means so can Wars ones, so, um-no?

5. George Lucas chose to call it cloak on the clone wars knowing what that word means having been popularized on star trek

Which, being out of universe information, even if true is completely irrelevant?

So by what is observed and the functions it performs we can say that the technology is similar at least on that level.

The term 'no' comes to mind.

[Batman]

Romulan weapons leave behind antiproton traces that curiously enough don't seem to do any damage whatsoever, which to me indicates there's not all that many of them.
Burden of proof to show that romulan disruptors involve delivering serious amounts of antimatter (as opposed to resulting in a lonely antiproton or other as an aftereffect) is on you, especially as just like phasers, disruptors have this nasty tendency to create effects completely incompatible with a DET weapon.

So this is what it has come down to? You want me to show that a disruptor carries 'serious' amount of antimatter?. We know ST tech keeps antimatter stored in containment. So we know they have the technology hold antimatter. So you show me how big of a container ST forces can make and that's how much a/m they can deliver with the upper limit being the constraints of the ship carrying it.

No, you blithering idiot. it's about the amount of antimatter a disruptor bolt actually delivers. I'm awaiting your quantifications.

[Jm81]

How do we know hyperspace exists in the ST galaxy?
We don't, but for the purpose of the debate, we assume it does.

Thus you're cherry picking now. Because if you applied your standard evenly, then you must find canon evidence that hyperspace exists in the ST universe. I get it, you have a high standard, I can respect that, all I ask is you apply it evenly. I await evidence that hyperspace exists in ST galaxy or you apply your standard evenly.

[Jm81]

Romulan weapons leave behind antiproton traces that curiously enough don't seem to do any damage whatsoever, which to me indicates there's not all that many of them.
Burden of proof to show that romulan disruptors involve delivering serious amounts of antimatter (as opposed to resulting in a lonely antiproton or other as an aftereffect) is on you, especially as just like phasers, disruptors have this nasty tendency to create effects completely incompatible with a DET weapon.

So this is what it has come down to? You want me to show that a disruptor carries 'serious' amount of antimatter?. We know ST tech keeps antimatter stored in containment. So we know they have the technology hold antimatter. So you show me how big of a container ST forces can make and that's how much a/m they can deliver with the upper limit being the constraints of the ship carrying it.

No, you blithering idiot. it's about the amount of antimatter a disruptor bolt actually delivers. I'm awaiting your quantifications.

Why is that even important? They could put the antimatter in a container and push it. I fail to see why this is even a question?

[Batman]

How do we know hyperspace exists in the ST galaxy?
We don't, but for the purpose of the debate, we assume it does.

Thus you're cherry picking now. Because if you applied your standard evenly, then you must find canon evidence that hyperspace exists in the ST universe. I get it, you have a high standard, I can respect that, all I ask is you apply it evenly. I await evidence that hyperspace exists in ST galaxy or you apply your standard evenly.

I await evidence that Warp drive works in the Wars Galaxy, that phasers do, shields, navigational deflectors, SIF, transporters...
You don't have any? Well that's curious. Why am I supposed to assume any of them do? Because otherwise there's no versus you moron.
What I don't have to assume is those technologies being capable of doing anything we haven't seen them do before.

[Jm81]

I await evidence that Warp drive works in the Wars Galaxy, that phasers do, shields, navigational deflectors, SIF, transporters...
You don't have any? Well that's curious. Why am I supposed to assume any of them do? Because otherwise there's no versus you moron.
What I don't have to assume is those technologies being capable of doing anything we haven't seen them do before.

I don't have to show that being we aren't in SW galaxy.

You have a stricter standard so employ it equally or don't at all.

[Batman]

So this is what it has come down to? You want me to show that a disruptor carries 'serious' amount of antimatter?. We know ST tech keeps antimatter stored in containment. So we know they have the technology hold antimatter. So you show me how big of a container ST forces can make and that's how much a/m they can deliver with the upper limit being the constraints of the ship carrying it.

No, you blithering idiot. it's about the amount of antimatter a disruptor bolt actually delivers. I'm awaiting your quantifications.

Why is that even important? They could put the antimatter in a container and push it. I fail to see why this is even a question?

You were the one who brought up Romulan weapons as if they were actually important, you know. If you want to admit that yes, that was actually pretty damned irrelevant and I'm sorry I wasted everybody's time with it, all you have to do is say so.

[Jm81]

You were the one who brought up Romulan weapons as if they were actually important, you know. If you want to admit that yes, that was actually pretty damned irrelevant and I'm sorry I wasted everybody's time with it, all you have to do is say so.

You missed it entirely. The reason I brought it up was to show that a/m weapons are used in the ST universe. Nothing more.

[Batman]

One of us missed it, certainly. We know A/M weapons are used in Trek. The term 'photon torpedo' comes to mind. Romulan disruptors leaving behind miniscule amounts of antiprotons, however, doesn't make them M/AM weapons.

[Jm81]

One of us missed it, certainly. We know A/M weapons are used in Trek. The term 'photon torpedo' comes to mind. Romulan disruptors leaving behind miniscule amounts of antiprotons, however, doesn't make them M/AM weapons.

You really should watch the vid before you post. Data called it "high levels of residual anti-protons". So much for miniscule...

[Batman]

Those high levels of residual antiprotons...that curiously enough completely failed to spectacularly blow up the environment they were hanging about. Yes, I think I'm sticking with 'miniscule'. I positively don't hate to tell you but a 'high' number doesn't mean...anything, really, without a frame of reference. What is the frame of reference, if you could be bothered?

[Jm81]

Those high levels of residual antiprotons...that curiously enough completely failed to spectacularly blow up the environment they were hanging about. Yes, I think I'm sticking with 'miniscule'. I positively don't hate to tell you but a 'high' number doesn't mean...anything, really, without a frame of reference. What is the frame of reference, if you could be bothered?

Oh correction, data said extremely high levels...

Blow up the environment?? What are you talking about they were in space void of matter to react with. Seriously you didn't watch the video did you?

[Batman]

'Extremely high' as compared to...what? You still haven't answered that question, or how if at all that figures into the workings of romulan disruptors.

[Jm81]

'Extremely high' as compared to...what? You still haven't answered that question, or how if at all that figures into the workings of romulan disruptors.

Who knows. I don't.
Who cares. Point is weaponized a/m armament is used by the ST powers. How much a/m a ST ship wants to put into a container and shoot at a target is up to them.

[Lord Revan]

'Extremely high' as compared to...what? You still haven't answered that question, or how if at all that figures into the workings of romulan disruptors.

Who knows. I don't.
Who cares. Point is weaponized a/m armament is used by the ST powers. How much a/m a ST ship wants to put into a container and shoot at a target is up to them.

not really anti-matter is still not magic, how much is limited by the technology avaible and I can think of just 1 example where a matter/anti-matter charge greater then the 3 kg one on a torpedo was used, which suggest it's not common, for all we know large scale AM containment needs alot larger then the actual container infrastucture within the ship.

and to what is the residue "extremly high" compared to is very important since even a milligram (that's 1/1000th of a gram) can be extremly high if normally there's no where near the same amount of anti-matter and if my calcs where correct at 100% effiency 1 milligram would have yield of about 21 tons of TNT and nothing is ever 100% effiencient.

besides you can only put so much cargo on a shuttle and anything bigger then a runabout is too big to fit under the shields anyway.

[Captain Seafort]

besides you can only put so much cargo on a shuttle and anything bigger then a runabout is too big to fit under the shields anyway.

Assuming anything can push through shields in the way Brian claims in the first place. He shows a bunch of scenes in the CW cartoon, which simply depict the fighters firing on unshielded ships with no indication of whether they pushed through the shields or the shields were up in the first place. He tends to ignore the various fighters and asteroids hitting the shields at about the same speed, and Ackbar's explicit statement that the rebel capships would have to disable Imp shields before the fighters even stood a chance against them.

[Ted C]

Isn't there a scene in Empire Strikes Back where the Falcon lands on an ISD's hull after an Imperial officer ordered the shields raised?

Do you have any proof the shields are skin tight?

This incident actually supports the notion that Imperial shields are skin tight. If they were distant from the hull, the Falcon would have had to go through shields to land on the ISD's tower. If they're skin tight, then something like an electromagnet could presumably stick to the hull right through the shield.

Also, in TPM, we saw that the shields of a Naboo starfighter are skin tight when Anakin's fighter powered back up in the hangar bay of the TradeFed command ship. There was a brief, skin-tight shimmer as the shields came back on. There's no reason to assume that shields on larger vessels work on substantially different principles.

The only "bubble" shields we saw were the one projected around the DS2 from Endor and the Gungan shields on Naboo. The only other mentions of remote shields are the "magnetic field" that Rebel fighters had to pass through on their approach to the DS1 and the Rebel theater shield on Hoth.

[Jm81]

'Extremely high' as compared to...what? You still haven't answered that question, or how if at all that figures into the workings of romulan disruptors.

Who knows. I don't.
Who cares. Point is weaponized a/m armament is used by the ST powers. How much a/m a ST ship wants to put into a container and shoot at a target is up to them.

not really anti-matter is still not magic, how much is limited by the technology avaible and I can think of just 1 example where a matter/anti-matter charge greater then the 3 kg one on a torpedo was used, which suggest it's not common, for all we know large scale AM containment needs alot larger then the actual container infrastucture within the ship.

and to what is the residue "extremly high" compared to is very important since even a milligram (that's 1/1000th of a gram) can be extremly high if normally there's no where near the same amount of anti-matter and if my calcs where correct at 100% effiency 1 milligram would have yield of about 21 tons of TNT and nothing is ever 100% effiencient.

besides you can only put so much cargo on a shuttle and anything bigger then a runabout is too big to fit under the shields anyway.

If your point is to suggest that there is a limit to how much a/m a runabout can carry and that entire star destroyers wont be vaporized by a single small ship, then yes we are in agreement.

[Batman]

I don't know what his point is, mine was 'why bring up the antimatter residue of romulan disruptors in the first place if you weren't talking about romulan disruptors?'

[Jm81]

besides you can only put so much cargo on a shuttle and anything bigger then a runabout is too big to fit under the shields anyway.

Assuming anything can push through shields in the way Brian claims in the first place. He shows a bunch of scenes in the CW cartoon, which simply depict the fighters firing on unshielded ships with no indication of whether they pushed through the shields or the shields were up in the first place. He tends to ignore the various fighters and asteroids hitting the shields at about the same speed, and Ackbar's explicit statement that the rebel capships would have to disable Imp shields before the fighters even stood a chance against them.

I would point to time stamp 5:45 - 6:50 of Brian's video.
I would point to time stamp 8:18 - 8:25 of Brian's video.
I would point to time stamp 10:28 - 10:59 of Brian's video.

All times of canon evidence of small ships passing through SW shields with mention of those shields being up and having to be taken out (and taken down in some cases).

[Jm81]

Isn't there a scene in Empire Strikes Back where the Falcon lands on an ISD's hull after an Imperial officer ordered the shields raised?

Do you have any proof the shields are skin tight?

This incident actually supports the notion that Imperial shields are skin tight. If they were distant from the hull, the Falcon would have had to go through shields to land on the ISD's tower. If they're skin tight, then something like an electromagnet could presumably stick to the hull right through the shield.

Also, in TPM, we saw that the shields of a Naboo starfighter are skin tight when Anakin's fighter powered back up in the hangar bay of the TradeFed command ship. There was a brief, skin-tight shimmer as the shields came back on. There's no reason to assume that shields on larger vessels work on substantially different principles.

The only "bubble" shields we saw were the one projected around the DS2 from Endor and the Gungan shields on Naboo. The only other mentions of remote shields are the "magnetic field" that Rebel fighters had to pass through on their approach to the DS1 and the Rebel theater shield on Hoth.

Happy you brought this up. Right after the skin tight shield went up this happened:
http://forums.asvs.org/showthread.php/2 ... t-2/page14

Shows direct metal on metal interactions.

[Jm81]

I don't know what his point is, mine was 'why bring up the antimatter residue of romulan disruptors in the first place if you weren't talking about romulan disruptors?'

I am not sure, perhaps we started talking past each other a while back. My sole point is to establish a precident for weaponized a/m weapons in the ST universe.

[Batman]

*cough* Photon torpedoes?

[Batman]

Also, there's no 'I' in precedent and weaponized weapons is sort of redundant.

[Lord Revan]

my point was that you should show that there's M/AM that are both high yield enough to actually signifigantly harm SW warships and small enough to be able to be deployed from a shuttle sized vessel (this includes the runabouts but not the Defiant class(or similar sized ships like the BOP)) as anything larger is too big to employ this tactic anyway.

photon torps while m/am weapons have nowhere near the yield to really harm the larger SW ships, having a max theoretical yield of 64 Mt with actual practical yield seeming to be high kt or low Mt at best.

As I've stated several times in this thread anti-matter IS NOT MAGIC and there's limits to it's use.

oh and I never suggested that you'd need to vaporize or even utterly destroy a SW warship, just harm it enough to force it to retreat or cripple it for any signifigant time.