Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
https://bbs.stardestroyer.net/
and instead she tries to find out a special tool made for cutting Toranium really slowly in emergencies.Point taken, which is why I hunted down the quotation from Eddington on phaser rifles firing pulses above.Slartibartfast wrote:Can you stop guessing and making shit up?
Conjecture = guessing. This is not a "conjecture" forum.
"Well, who knows why they made the TNG nacelles all glowy and stuff. Maybe they're designed to fly circles around enemy ships and make them travel back in time! Yes that's just conjecture, but that doesn't mean it isn't true! You can't prove it isn't!"
Define 'shit'. They can kill a human or human-analog with a single hit, and can fire shots of that setting damn often. Perfectly acceptable for a sidearm.brianeyci wrote:It's time to add my insignificant weight to the packing crate debate.
We know that Toranium resists phaser fire extremely well. Or do we? Hand phasers are shit -- the Federation uses them all the time for purposes from lighting up rocks to welding a door. We know their power output would be shit.
Proven wrong by the very phaser rifle. If they do care that little for ergonomics, why is the rifle ergonomically much less horrible than the Type 2?If hand phasers were powerful, why would there be any reason to use the Type-III phaser rifle? Sure there are ergonomic reasons, and a faster refire rate, but Federation has shown little concern for ergonomics in their weapons designs.
No evidence whatsoever for the more powerful punch. Higher refire rate, maybe greater range, you can nearly aim with the thing...The logical reason to think of why someone would use a Type-III would be for a higher refire rate, and more powerful punch.
Err-what?The "Kira used a bipolar torch" argument doesn't hold weight either. I haven't seen the episode, so I can't comment on whether there were a lot of security with Type-III's around. You could make the argument that Kira didn't want to use overkill on the door, and so on.
Unless we ever saw a Type III do more damage than a Type II, there's no reason to assume it will perform any better.Unless we saw a Type-III being used on that door, the door says nothing about Type-III's.
Only if there were any evidence for the Type III being more powerful than the Type II.The same argument that is used against Toranium not being used on starship hulls -- namely that the power levels of starship level weapons are much greater and render Toranium-armored hulls useless -- could be used with the Type-III phaser rifle.
a)assumes Borg have access to Duranium deposits/manufacturing abilitiesAs well, if Toranium was something easily manufactured and implemented, you would think you would see Toranium on Borg drones.
Or the Borg knew that their shields could easily handle phaser fire, like they usually do. Virtually all of the Borg killed in FC were killed by KE attacks.But what we saw in ST:FC was some leathery armor. Obviously, the Borg knew they would be facing phaser rifles, not hand phasers. Either Toranium was not available, or the Borg decided logically that phaser rifles would be used, not hand phasers.
Unproven assumption. Means that the Borg KNEW Toranium, knew it was phaser resistant, had access to it, and it wasn't too heavy to be practical.Which means the Borg thought that phaser rifles would punch through Toranium.
Why not? It fits all the evidence.The Hansens observed a "tactical drone" which sported Tritanium armor, so the Borg use body armor. And don't give me that shit about "The Borg are stupid".
If it is the simplest explanation, than it is most likely the right one.That should only be a last resort explaination, and if it is your first then your argument is weak.
Obviously.So what we have are the following possibilities,
1. Toranium is effective against hand phasers.
As we IIRC never before or after heard about it, obviously true.2. Toranium is effective against all phasers, but is not in widespread use.
Why?brianeyci wrote:As well, Eddington says this in DS9 "The Adversary",
EDDINGTON
We've reconfigured the rifles to
fire an expanding energy pulse.
Since I don't have the DVD's, I don't know how this translated on-screen. If it looks on screen as I think it would look, then it would suggest that the ability to fire pulses are not unique to the ST:FC phaser rifles. As well, the words "expanding energy pulse" seem to suggest that pulse-type fire doesn't operate like the NDF theory, but through DET.
Why?Since pulse-type fire hasn't demonstated the same abilities as beam-type fire, such as vaporization and so on, it would seem to me that the NDF theory introduces unnecessary postulates to pulse-type fire.
Show how it is somehow NOT compatible with the NDF theory. As long as it looks like a phaser, behaves like a phaser, and is called a phaser, the reasonable assumption is that it IS a phaser, and thus uses NDF. Apart from firing pules instead of beams (and variable-duration beams are a known capacity of of phasers, pulses are essentially really short beams) I see no difference between pulse and beam phasers.Again, I am a noob at this, so I wouldn't mind an explaination about how the NDF theory is compatable with pulse-type phaser rifle fire.
I may be thinking of the wrong episode, but weren't they basically trying to DETECT the changeling instead of harming it? That would absolutely coincide with a low poer setting in this case. Add to that that they reconfigured the rifles, whereas the FC ones fired pulse from the word GO, and Eddington called them EXPANDING pulses, which would aid in the detection problem (they intended to 'sweep the entire ship with phaser fire'). Doesn't look like that is an example of bog-standard rifle pulses to me, but a custom modification that has no relation to standard pulse phasers.<edit> some more thoughts about the above quote. Eddington and Sisko adapted the phaser rifles to fire "expanding energy pulses" so that they could hunt down the changeling. Why would they want to do this? Odo also says this right after Eddington,
ODO
The phasers are set low enough to
avoid damaging equipment... but high
enough to affect the changeling.
So does that mean pulse-type fire is just beam-type fire, but on a lower power setting? I tend to disagree.
They intended to FIND the changeling. They basically turned those rifles into ACTIVE SENSORS. Hardly a good example of pulse phaser fire.So perhaps what Eddington meant is that he reconfigured the phaser rifle to fire "energy pulses", using DET rather than relying on chain-reaction to damage the changeling.
Because for some reason, they used an "expanding energy pulse" to hunt for the changeling. An expanding energy pulse reminds me of the following situations,Batman wrote:Why?brianeyci wrote:As well, Eddington says this in DS9 "The Adversary",
EDDINGTON
We've reconfigured the rifles to
fire an expanding energy pulse.
Since I don't have the DVD's, I don't know how this translated on-screen. If it looks on screen as I think it would look, then it would suggest that the ability to fire pulses are not unique to the ST:FC phaser rifles. As well, the words "expanding energy pulse" seem to suggest that pulse-type fire doesn't operate like the NDF theory, but through DET.
Because it is not necessary to introduce NDF to explain the things pulse firing phaser rifles do. I don't remember a pulse firing phaser rifle vaporizing (correct me if I'm wrong), I don't remember a pulse firing phaser rifle demonstrating the same material weakness. From reading DW's NDF article, it seems that the most important reason why the NDF theory is necessary is to explain disintegration. I do not remember a pulse phaser rifle vaporizing someone.Why?Since pulse-type fire hasn't demonstated the same abilities as beam-type fire, such as vaporization and so on, it would seem to me that the NDF theory introduces unnecessary postulates to pulse-type fire.
I cannot show that pulse phaser rifles are inconsistent with the NDF theory -- they are consistent, if we assume that a pulse at a high enough power level can vaporize someone. To me, it is not necessary to introduce NDF to pulse phaser fire, because pulse phaser fire hasn't been demonstrated to vaporize someone (correct me if I'm wrong).Show how it is somehow NOT compatible with the NDF theory. As long as it looks like a phaser, behaves like a phaser, and is called a phaser, the reasonable assumption is that it IS a phaser, and thus uses NDF. Apart from firing pules instead of beams (and variable-duration beams are a known capacity of of phasers, pulses are essentially really short beams) I see no difference between pulse and beam phasers.Again, I am a noob at this, so I wouldn't mind an explaination about how the NDF theory is compatable with pulse-type phaser rifle fire.
Yes, I don't know how this translated on screen. However, "detecting" the changeling would be important whether or not they wanted to kill it, or stun it. They did want to stun it, but you don't get many orders to "set phasers to kill". Since the changeling could possibly morph to a material that was phaser resistant, such as Toranium or Tritanium, Eddington may have modified the rifles to be less material dependent.I may be thinking of the wrong episode, but weren't they basically trying to DETECT the changeling instead of harming it? That would absolutely coincide with a low poer setting in this case. Add to that that they reconfigured the rifles, whereas the FC ones fired pulse from the word GO, and Eddington called them EXPANDING pulses, which would aid in the detection problem (they intended to 'sweep the entire ship with phaser fire'). Doesn't look like that is an example of bog-standard rifle pulses to me, but a custom modification that has no relation to standard pulse phasers.<edit> some more thoughts about the above quote. Eddington and Sisko adapted the phaser rifles to fire "expanding energy pulses" so that they could hunt down the changeling. Why would they want to do this? Odo also says this right after Eddington,
ODO
The phasers are set low enough to
avoid damaging equipment... but high
enough to affect the changeling.
So does that mean pulse-type fire is just beam-type fire, but on a lower power setting? I tend to disagree.
Yes, but finding the changeling would be important whether or not they wanted to kill or stun it. They would need to turn the phaser rifles into active sensors if they wanted to kill or stun it.They intended to FIND the changeling. They basically turned those rifles into ACTIVE SENSORS. Hardly a good example of pulse phaser fire.So perhaps what Eddington meant is that he reconfigured the phaser rifle to fire "energy pulses", using DET rather than relying on chain-reaction to damage the changeling.
The theory is there by definition, because unless you have compelling evidence that pulse phasers do operate on a different principle than beam ones, they still do.brianeyci wrote:Because it is not necessary to introduce NDF to explain the things pulse firing phaser rifles do.Why?Since pulse-type fire hasn't demonstated the same abilities as beam-type fire, such as vaporization and so on, it would seem to me that the NDF theory introduces unnecessary postulates to pulse-type fire.
So? We know phasers dont do so all the time. Indeed, they rarely do. As an actual feature in combat, desintegrate is quite simply useless. No point in using that option, or even building it into the pulse rifles. Doesn't mean they're not using NDF.I don't remember a pulse firing phaser rifle vaporizing (correct me if I'm wrong),
No surprise, since they're (almost?) exclusively used against organic targets. You got any examples of them being MORE effective against phaser-resistant material? I severely doubt it given that they rely on the same energy storage technology, and thus CANNOT be vastly more powerful.I don't remember a pulse firing phaser rifle demonstrating the same material weakness.
I don't remember pistol phasers doing all that often, either. Fact remains that phasers work at least partly on NDF, and unless you can show pulse phasers doing something beam phasers can't, there's no reason to assume they work on another principle.From reading DW's NDF article, it seems that the most important reason why the NDF theory is necessary is to explain disintegration. I do not remember a pulse phaser rifle vaporizing someone.
NDF is an inherent part of phaser functionality. We are not introducing a thing. Unless pulse phasers do something beam phasers CAN'T there's no reason to assume they do NOT use NDF.I cannot show that pulse phaser rifles are inconsistent with the NDF theory -- they are consistent, if we assume that a pulse at a high enough power level can vaporize someone. To me, it is not necessary to introduce NDF to pulse phaser fire, because pulse phaser fire hasn't been demonstrated to vaporize someone (correct me if I'm wrong).Show how it is somehow NOT compatible with the NDF theory. As long as it looks like a phaser, behaves like a phaser, and is called a phaser, the reasonable assumption is that it IS a phaser, and thus uses NDF. Apart from firing pules instead of beams (and variable-duration beams are a known capacity of of phasers, pulses are essentially really short beams) I see no difference between pulse and beam phasers.Again, I am a noob at this, so I wouldn't mind an explaination about how the NDF theory is compatable with pulse-type phaser rifle fire.
So? Phasers do so rarely anyway. Maybe the finally ralised that option is useless in combat situation and stopped using it.Pulse phasers, to my knowledge, haven't been demonstrated to vaporize someone.
Given that the only difference between a pulse and a beam is duration-err, yes they are.Pulses are not really short beams.
1. No evidence of the torpedo glow growth. Torpedoes stay the same size throughout their flight.Look at the image above -- the Type-III fires "expanding energy pulses", sort of like a torpedo's glow growth.
Come again? Phaser beams glow orange, phaser pulses glow orange. What exactly are you talking about?The Type-II fired a short beam but the beam did not glow like the pulse.
It looks like a phaser, it's called a phaser, it freaking behaves like a phaser. Rather says phaser to me...The argument that it "looks" like a phaser, then it is phaser doesn't work for me.
That scene is from the cave sequence,right? Just so I can place it.Take a look at the screenshot above. From looking at the short beams from the Type-II and at the small "expanding energy pulse" from the Type-III,
Given that torpedo visuals have NOTHING to do with their DET nature, uh-no. It looks like, acts like, and is called a phaser. YOU show how it is related to torpedo propulsion.it would seem that entirely different mechanisms would be required to create the minature torpedo-like projectile than a Type-II that fires really short beams.
You have ONE picture of them doing so. Got any more? I should warn you that this site has at least one picture of it firing the ordinary orange beam, so...The Type-III pulse is also shaped like a wishbone, and its glow size is considerably more diffuse than the Type-II shot, although less bright.
Fucked up SFX unless they always look that way. If you want an in-universe answer, quantum-polarinary fluctuation in the subspace collimation particle abominator.We could attribute the glow of the Type-III shot to the pulse having a lower/higher power level than the beam -- however, how does that explain the wishbone shape?
Err-we'Re talking about an energy (possibly exotic particle) weapon. A pulse is BY DEFINITION a very short beam.It doesn't look like a short beam to me.
In that one screen shot. Unless I'm very much mistaken they USUALLY look like really short beams (i.e. same color, and a sufficiently short beam will naturally look spherical. I'll see if I can find some screenshots.Type-II's fire very defined, bright shots, while the Type-III fires diffuse, wishbone shaped shots.
It's called a phaser, it looks like a phaser, it freakin behaves like a phaser. Sounds like a phaser to me.The argument that it is "called a phaser then is a phaser" doesn't work for me.
So there are pahserish weeapons that aren't called that. We already knew this. They're called disruptors.In TOS, in an early episode, there were "laser pistols" -- however, I don't remember them working like lasers, they could disintegrate matter.
Too bad pulse phasers DON'T act radically different from beam phasers. They've NEVER EVER done anything a beam phaser can't. I reiterate: It looks like a phaser...You might call this a bad example because, for all we know, all lasers could disintegrate matter in the ST universe. That is not my point. My point is something can still be named one way, and another object the same way, and do things radically differently.
And pulse phasers have NEVER EVER done anything a beam phaser can't. If it looks like a phaser...The way we should decide whether or not one object has the same mechanisms/properties as another object should not be by its nomenclature, but by the properties both objects exhibit.
Completely baseless speculation. ALL we know is those phasers were modified to detect changelings. Proof that changelings can morph into phaser-resistant materials is up to you to provide.Yes, I don't know how this translated on screen. However, "detecting" the changeling would be important whether or not they wanted to kill it, or stun it. They did want to stun it, but you don't get many orders to "set phasers to kill". Since the changeling could possibly morph to a material that was phaser resistant, such as Toranium or Tritanium, Eddington may have modified the rifles to be less material dependent.I may be thinking of the wrong episode, but weren't they basically trying to DETECT the changeling instead of harming it? That would absolutely coincide with a low poer setting in this case. Add to that that they reconfigured the rifles, whereas the FC ones fired pulse from the word GO, and Eddington called them EXPANDING pulses, which would aid in the detection problem (they intended to 'sweep the entire ship with phaser fire'). Doesn't look like that is an example of bog-standard rifle pulses to me, but a custom modification that has no relation to standard pulse phasers.<edit> some more thoughts about the above quote. Eddington and Sisko adapted the phaser rifles to fire "expanding energy pulses" so that they could hunt down the changeling. Why would they want to do this? Odo also says this right after Eddington,
ODO
The phasers are set low enough to
avoid damaging equipment... but high
enough to affect the changeling.
So does that mean pulse-type fire is just beam-type fire, but on a lower power setting? I tend to disagree.
OF course, otherwise they wouldn't know what to shoot at.HOWEVER, the setting they use for DETECTION is NOT the one to determine wether or not Type IIIs are DET weapons. For which you so far have shown no evidence, they can be (used as) pulse weapons without NOT using NDF.Yes, but finding the changeling would be important whether or not they wanted to kill or stun it. They would need to turn the phaser rifles into active sensors if they wanted to kill or stun it.They intended to FIND the changeling. They basically turned those rifles into ACTIVE SENSORS. Hardly a good example of pulse phaser fire.So perhaps what Eddington meant is that he reconfigured the phaser rifle to fire "energy pulses", using DET rather than relying on chain-reaction to damage the changeling.
Baseless speculation. Evidence of schangelings morphing into phaser-resistant material completely absent. You have no point.The point of bringing up the Eddington quotation is not to compare pulse-type rifles to the modification that Eddington made. It is to say that phaser rifles could rely on DET rather than NDF, the main argument being that Eddington may have modified the rifles to be more effective against changelings who could morph into something phaser resistant.
BASELESS SPECULATION. The modification doesn't appy to the damage aspect of phasers AT ALL.So hence, the pulse-phaser rifles which fired similar shots (I need screenshots of "The Adversary") could rely on DET rather than NDF.
Who said they were low powered?If this part of my argument is wrong, then there is the other part of the argument -- the visual evidence that shows that pulse phaser shots don't look like low powered hand phaser shots
So?, and that we have not seen a pulse phaser vaporizing someone.
http://www.stargate-tech.net/ground/goauld/personal.htmntstlkr wrote:What mechanism can, by varying the power output alone, cause a transfer of energy (ray, beam, particles, whatever) that stuns on low (no matter the physiology of the individual involved, relative health, age, body mass, pre-existing medical conditions etc), heats on low-medium, kills on medium to medium high. Then totally vaporizes on high?
I think what he means is that the pulses don't look like what you'd think a very short phaser beam would, compared the beam next to them.Batman wrote:Fucked up SFX unless they always look that way. If you want an in-universe answer, quantum-polarinary fluctuation in the subspace collimation particle abominator.We could attribute the glow of the Type-III shot to the pulse having a lower/higher power level than the beam -- however, how does that explain the wishbone shape?Err-we'Re talking about an energy (possibly exotic particle) weapon. A pulse is BY DEFINITION a very short beam.It doesn't look like a short beam to me.
I haven't seen the episode, but maybe the changeling couldnt simply morph into a phaser resistant form was because that might have been exactly what they were looking for?brianeyci wrote:Since the changeling could possibly morph to a material that was phaser resistant, such as Toranium or Tritanium, Eddington may have modified the rifles to be less material dependent.
Pulse-firing "phaser rifles" have not been seen to vaporize someone. Therefore, by Occam's razor, if you only consider the pulse firing phaser rifle itself, it is not necessary to introduce the NDF theory. My understanding of NDF theory comes from Wong's article which says that disintegration, planetary bombardment, and armor effectiveness is the reason why the NDF theory works with the observations of phasers, I know there are other NDF theories out there -- if there are other reasons why the NDF theory is necessary, we can explore them.Batman wrote:The theory is there by definition, because unless you have compelling evidence that pulse phasers do operate on a different principle than beam ones, they still do.
Of course. But it does not mean they are using NDF, unless you assume continuity between beam fired shots and pulse shots. Just comparing the name is not good enough. The best way is to examine what the pulses actually do, and what the beams actually do.So? We know phasers dont do so all the time. Indeed, they rarely do. As an actual feature in combat, desintegrate is quite simply useless. No point in using that option, or even building it into the pulse rifles. Doesn't mean they're not using NDF.
Point conceded. They are not vastly more powerful. Pulse-fired shots seem to exhibit the same weakness that beam fired shots do to thick armor. I found an example in ST: Nemesis.No surprise, since they're (almost?) exclusively used against organic targets. You got any examples of them being MORE effective against phaser-resistant material? I severely doubt it given that they rely on the same energy storage technology, and thus CANNOT be vastly more powerful.
True. But everything we have seen beam type phasers do we have not seen pulse type phasers do. So we cannot conclude equality unless you assume continuity between beam type phasers and pluse type phasers.Everything we've seen pulse phasers do, we've seen beam phasers do, too.
"We"? I'm not debating the correctness of the NDF theory. I am introducing another theory for pulse-fired phasers. If Pulse phasers do not vaporize, and do not "stun" (I do not remember them doing this), then it is not necessary to use NDF to explain the pulses.NDF is an inherent part of phaser functionality. We are not introducing a thing. Unless pulse phasers do something beam phasers CAN'T there's no reason to assume they do NOT use NDF.
True. But it is not necessary to introduce NDF to explain this. You could just as well introduce another technobabble effect to explain the scorch marks. From my understanding of NDF, it is necessary to explain vaporization. No vaporization, no NDF necessary.Another thought:How do you kill a man with a DET weapon without doing any visible tissue damage? All we ever see is a scorch mark 4 inches across, and maybe occasionally some superficial burns. Yet death is almost always instentanious. Pray tell how that is done WITHOUT some funky technobabble effects.
We need screenshots of "The Adversary" to debate this point further. I am not debating torpedoes, so I won't go into the glow growth thing -- came from DS site, which I am starting to have serious reservations against. However, there is a "glow", a diffuse glow not present in beam type firing.1. No evidence of the torpedo glow growth. Torpedoes stay the same size throughout their flight.
2. Type IIIs can be modified to emit expanding energy pulses FOR DETECTION PURPOSES. NOT a valid example of pulse phasers. REAL phaser pulses don't expand, and never do anything a phaser beam couldn't do either.
I am talking abut the diffuse glow of the pulse shots, compared to the tight narrowly confined beam of the beam shots. Observe the following.Come again? Phaser beams glow orange, phaser pulses glow orange. What exactly are you talking about?
1. I need screenshots of "The Adversary" to confirm what the "expanding pulses" look like.That scene is from the cave sequence,right? Just so I can place it.
1. They Type III's do NOT fire 'expanding energy pulses', they fire pulses, period. The expandinng pulse thing was a modification done for a specific purpose. IIRC, Type IIIs originally fired beams, too.
2. There is NO evidence for a 'glow expansion' in torpedoes. NTM the 'torpedo glow' is a completely different color from phaser pulses (IIRC red for photorps vs usually orange for phaser pulses, and green with an orange glow for your screenshot.
3. Given that the glow of photorps is either completely useless pyrotechnics or a function of their drive system, YOU show how a weapon that looks like, acts like and is actually called a phaser somehow incorporates a Warp sustainer system. Or useless pyrotechnics.
I am not trying to relate it to the propulsion of a torpedo. I am trying to say that there is a difference.Given that torpedo visuals have NOTHING to do with their DET nature, uh-no. It looks like, acts like, and is called a phaser. YOU show how it is related to torpedo propulsion.
Yes, Type-III phasers can fire in beam mode and they can fire in pulse mode. Big deal. We are interested in pulse-type fire, not whether or not Type-III's can fire in beam mode as well as pulse mode. The screenshots there are not too useful -- they show shots of the phaser about to fire, and it is hard to tell what is a beam and what is a pulse. We need closeups of pulse-type fire -- if you have some, I would be grateful if you posted them.You have ONE picture of them doing so. Got any more? I should warn you that this site has at least one picture of it firing the ordinary orange beam, so..
Yes, I am beginning to see your point. However, the uh "quantum-polarinary fluctuation in the subspace collimation particle abominator" could just as easily be another answer -- perhaps that the pulse-type firing works on a different mechanism that beam-type firing.Fucked up SFX unless they always look that way. If you want an in-universe answer, quantum-polarinary fluctuation in the subspace collimation particle abominator.
Yes, we need some screenshots, thanks.In that one screen shot. Unless I'm very much mistaken they USUALLY look like really short beams (i.e. same color, and a sufficiently short beam will naturally look spherical. I'll see if I can find some screenshots. The Defiants PPC's certainly looked like that.
Yes. So the implication there could be non-phaserish weapons that are called phasers. For example, perhaps a pulse-phaser that cannot vaporize because it does not operate by NDF.So there are pahserish weeapons that aren't called that. We already knew this. They're called disruptors.
They haven't been seen to vaporize someone, hence introducing NDF is not necessary. Beam phasers do everything that pulse phasers do. However, Pulse phasers have not done everything that beam phasers have, hence we do not have equality based on that point.Too bad pulse phasers DON'T act radically different from beam phasers. They've NEVER EVER done anything a beam phaser can't. I reiterate: It looks like a phaser...
Correct. Beam phasers do everything pulse phasers do. But pulse phasers have not been seen to do everything that beam phasers do, namely vaporize someone.And pulse phasers have NEVER EVER done anything a beam phaser can't. If it looks like a phaser...
Very well, I will look more into this. Actually I remember episodes where Changelings were resistant to single phaser blasts at maximum power, but required several phaser shots to kill it -- perhaps disruptor shots. That is phaser resistance to me. I will see if I can get screenshots of this.Completely baseless speculation. ALL we know is those phasers were modified to detect changelings. Proof that changelings can morph into phaser-resistant materials is up to you to provide.
The simple answer is that Eddington modified the phaser rifle to detect the changeling. However, I will try and find screenshots of changelings resisting phaser fire. If Eddington was aware of this, he may have altered the phaser to use a different mechanism than usual.BASELESS SPECULATION. The modification doesn't appy to the damage aspect of phasers AT ALL.
Beam phasers have done everything that pulse phasers have done, namely punch holes through things. However, pulse phasers have not done everything that beam phasers have, namely vaporize someone. I am not trying to be nitpicky -- my point is that one thing (beam phasers) can have all the properties of another thing (pulse phasers), yet not operate by the same principle because it does extra things (vaporization).So?
They look like phasers, they're called phasers, they act like pahsers, and usually they even have phaser SFX. They are garden variety NDF phasers.
Yes, exactly. By minimizing the number of NDF particles, or some technobabble like that, you could modify a phaser rifle to be solely dependent on non-NDF effects.Winston Blake wrote:See the entry on zat guns- stun, kill, vaporise. Although zat guns are different in that their effect depends on the number of shots, while zat guns would fire the same number of particles with each shot, a phaser's higher firing settings could fire more in a single shot.
The heating setting could be using the UV laser at a higher power (and/or perhaps different frequency, eg IR), while minimising the number of NDF particles.
Yes, that is what I am trying to get at -- that the pulses don't look like very short beams as you'd expect them to be.I think what he means is that the pulses don't look like what you'd think a very short phaser beam would, compared the beam next to them.
They look more like brighter points of light with streamers and glow coming off, and IIRC (i only saw STI when it came out) the streamers moved around them mid-flight (could just be me subconsciously giving the pulses torpedo characteristics).
That's some weird shit for a simple beam. I think the streamers can be considered not to be a part of the pulse, and are just diffraction spikes from such a bright point source.
The pulse then would be simply a high intensity (which assumably gives brightness), low velocity, very short beam. No 'expanding energy pulses' or RSA-esque 'glow growth' required.
Brianeyci, it seems unnecessarily elaborate to consider that pulse phasers operate on some different mechanism to normal ones when both have the same effects (absence of evidence for pulse vaporisation explained previously by others), same name and similar appearance (once you rationalise a little).
Yes -- however from reading the script I think the internal sensors were offline, and they were using phasers as a replacement. As usual, the tricorders were useless too. So they couldn't simply scan for phaser resistant material. I haven't watched the episode either -- screenshots of the episode, "The Adversary", would be helpful.I haven't seen the episode, but maybe the changeling couldnt simply morph into a phaser resistant form was because that might have been exactly what they were looking for?
Obviously, you don't realize that you can create a solid weld with a fairly localized heating effect, not to mention the fact that, as mentioned, Picard was actually using the same kind of weapon the Remans were. Kind of blows your whole argument away, doesn't it?brianeyci wrote:The Remans have extreme difficulty penetrating the door, while Picard with his Type-II is able to weld the door shut. Unfortunately, this example raises as many questions as it does answers. Picard's Type-II was able to weld the door shut, while the Remans who used disruptors were barely able to make dent marks?
Since a pulse would need to have vastly more power than a sustained beam in order to pump the same amount of energy into the target, this proves nothing. Beam phasers on lower power settings have exactly the same effects as pulse phasers.Beam phasers have done everything that pulse phasers have done, namely punch holes through things. However, pulse phasers have not done everything that beam phasers have, namely vaporize someone.
brianeyci wrote:Yes, exactly. By minimizing the number of NDF particles, or some technobabble like that, you could modify a phaser rifle to be solely dependent on non-NDF effects.
But now if phaser rifles are 'modified' (from normal phasers) to result in no disintegration, then that's basically the same as us saying they are always used on certain non-disintegration settings (changing a setting = modifying the weapon).Your idea makes sense. It does seem unnecessary to introduce another theory to explain pulse phasers. However, that does not mean that a phaser rifle could not be modified to rely less on NDF effects thus proving more effective against armor.
Nobody ever denied that there might be good reasons why they don't make body armour out of it (although one should not put too much weight on the fact that they don't; after all, they don't appear to know what a helmet is). The point is simply that there are certain materials against which phasers are obviously near-useless, hence there is no reason for Trekkies to scoff at the "packing crate" phenomenon.brianeyci wrote:My final defense against the Toranium information being useful in Star Trek is a solid one -- the in-universe in-character one. Toranium may be extremely useful against small arms phaser fire, but so are forcefields, which are already vastly deployed on Federation vessels. Nobody in Star Trek wears body armor a lot (or at all, I only remember the Hirogen, Borg and Klingons, the last of which is useless), and if someone did, the Toranium hasn't been seen to be in anything lighter than large cargo containers or heavy doors, so the armor would be heavy as shit and restrict movement. We already have other materials that resist phaser fire -- Tritanium is used in Federation vessel corridors and resist phaser fire well enough.
Very true. So if phasers have a firing mode that uses the least amount of NDF particles, what do we get? A stun shot? Or a heating shot? Either way, if phasers could fire in pure heating mode (as we have seen them do with heating up rocks and so on), then the Toranium material would have to be super-conductive and dissipate a lot of heat? Or is it that phasers don't emit a lot of heat in this mode? We know that phasers can make a rock molten, so what is the minimum temperature for this to happen? This Toranium is tough stuff.Winston Blake wrote:But now if phaser rifles are 'modified' (from normal phasers) to result in no disintegration, then that's basically the same as us saying they are always used on certain non-disintegration settings (changing a setting = modifying the weapon).
Part of the usefulness of an NDF weapon is that in the chain reaction some of the energy comes from the target, so you don't have to supply it. Making a phaser rifle rely less on NDF effects would make it less material dependent, but also make it weaker. It can no longer get away with using small amounts of energy to cause large amounts of damage.
So the way i see it is there's little point in making a super-powerful phaser constantly set to 'heating mode', since if you had that energy capacity available, you could include NDF settings and get even more bang for your buck with a chain reaction (however limited).