Intergalactic War

Who Wins The Inter-Universal War?

  • Stargate Universe

    Votes: 20 22.7%

  • Star Trek Universe

    Votes: 23 26.1%

  • Star Wars Universe

    Votes: 35 39.8%

  • The Radioactive Monkeys from PCX9999 will pwn Them all!

    Votes: 10 11.4%
  • Total voters
    88
This whole debate has amused me and i've done some digging. Just found this quote:
To most normal people, it's pretty obvious that giant-ass heavy-metal battlewagons could kick the **** out of shiny plastic ships with cool luxury options. He's just pointing out how obvious it looks, and he's got a point. Unfortunately, the Net is crawling with Trekkies who find this conclusion to be anything but obvious, and they traditionally bluffed pseudoscience in order to back up their bullfeathers. That's the biggest reason why this site was created in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
Pasi Nurminen said:
Star Wars still uses lasers. Lasers in the Star Trek universe are obsolete by about two hundred years or more.
Click to expand...
Style over substance falacy. You're making judgement based on only names, rather than performance. Even if Turbolasers were actual Lasers, they are still shown to dish out energies far above those which have caused Trek Shields to fail.

Also, see here for why Turbolasers aren't lasers.

In short:
It is actually very easy to determine that turbolasers cannot possibly be lasers. Lasers are merely a coherent assembly of photons, and photons have several important characteristics:

1. They always travel at the speed of light in vacuum, which is hardly surprising since they are light.

2. They do not interact with one another. If two lasers intersect, an interference pattern may appear in the region of intersection, but they will not impede one another in any way. The beams won't "bounce off" one another, stop at the collision point, or change direction or speed. They will continue as if nothing had happened.

3. They do not radiate energy in any direction other than their direction of travel. In other words, you will never see a laser in vacuum until it hits something. This is how laser pointers work- you can see the red dot but you can't see the beam. When lasers are filmed for dramatic purposes, they are invariably filmed in an extremely smoky or dusty environment, so the viewer will see the laser scattering off the dust and smoke. In a vacuum, a laser will always be invisible.

Obviously, turbolasers cannot possibly be lasers. They exhibit none of the characteristics of lasers. They travel much slower than the speed of light, they interact with one another (as demonstrated by the combining Death Star beam), and they are visible in vacuum. To put a twist on an old saying, if something doesn't walk like a duck, doesn't look like a duck, and doesn't quack like a duck, it probably ain't a duck.
Click to expand...

Lasers would not even damage a Star Trek vessel's shields. It would be no contest; a single Star Trek ship would wipe out a nearly infinite number of Star Wars ships.
Click to expand...
Based on a single out-of-context quote, which was spoken regarding a ship that was simply outclassed overall by the Enterprise D. Also, if Trek ships are immune to all lasers, regardless of power, then why were they endangered by laser-armed ships?

Obviously both are bunk science but phasers are more powerful. Star Trek shields are also obviously much more powerful than Star Wars "deflector shields," which in Star Trek are just used for navigation.
Click to expand...
Once again, moronic Style-Over substance, coupled with the assumption that because two things share a name, they must be Identical. (Made especially invalid by a name as vague as 'deflector') Wars shields routinely take more punishment than Trek shields. C'est la vie.
 
For what it is worth, I agree that Star Wars would kick the crap out of Star Trek. But Stargate obviously wrecks them all. The only sci-fi universe out there that might top Stargate would be Babylon 5 pre-first ones departure.
 
I think it really just boils down to a popularity contest. It's all just science fiction. Some people have tried to work out the actual physics of the various sci-fi universes. Current theory suggests that the things done in those sci-fi shows are physically impossible or would require the energy of a supernova. It seems pointless to debate it.
 
Murky said:
I think it really just boils down to a popularity contest. It's all just science fiction. Some people have tried to work out the actual physics of the various sci-fi universes. Current theory suggests that the things done in those sci-fi shows are physically impossible or would require the energy of a supernova. It seems pointless to debate it.
Click to expand...

A winner is you.
 
Murky said:
I think it really just boils down to a popularity contest. It's all just science fiction. Some people have tried to work out the actual physics of the various sci-fi universes. Current theory suggests that the things done in those sci-fi shows are physically impossible or would require the energy of a supernova. It seems pointless to debate it.
Click to expand...

Which is always very disappointing, as you would think a discussion on whether the Enterprise could take on the Death Star would be rather fun until the massive quotes of technical stats and physics start getting thrown around.

Frankly, I think it should all be decided on a belly flop competition between Jabba the Hutt and William Shatner.
 
This, in my mind, is one of the biggest strikes against Star Trek; that universe is still stuck in the archaic "battleship" mindset. WWII demonstrated clearly that flattops are the rulers of the sea. The days of battlewagons slugging it out to determine naval dominance died at Jutland, with Letye Gulf being a final encore performance. Star Trek's vaunted Starfleet capital ships would be doomed in a fight with any of the other realities.
 
If we are talking about "Star Trek" and not just the Federation alone, then the Borg easily defeat anything from Star Wars. Imagine what happens when the Borg assimilate a Jedi and create a Super Borg who can control the force? Also due to the Borgs adaptation abilities, their ships will be practically invulnerable, they would easily assimilate the entire Empire and Rebel Alliance.
 
VRWCAgent said:
I don't know if this was a false alarm or what, but just thought I'd throw this out. The following is what I got when I tried to go to that link in the quote.
<image snip>
Click to expand...

Well, that's a bit of a shock to see come up...

Try just going directly to the URL.

If we are talking about "Star Trek" and not just the Federation alone, then the Borg easily defeat anything from Star Wars. Imagine what happens when the Borg assimilate a Jedi and create a Super Borg who can control the force? Also due to the Borgs adaptation abilities, their ships will be practically invulnerable, they would easily assimilate the entire Empire and Rebel Alliance.
Click to expand...
Borg adaptation is simply a way of tuning their weapons and shields for maximum efficiency against a given threat. Not even perfect efficiency will save them from the orders-of-magnitude difference in power between the two franchises.
 
VRWCAgent said:
This, in my mind, is one of the biggest strikes against Star Trek; that universe is still stuck in the archaic "battleship" mindset. WWII demonstrated clearly that flattops are the rulers of the sea. The days of battlewagons slugging it out to determine naval dominance died at Jutland, with Letye Gulf being a final encore performance. Star Trek's vaunted Starfleet capital ships would be doomed in a fight with any of the other realities.
Click to expand...
What makes you think that this kinda progression must happen in space?
 
Perfection said:
What makes you think that this kinda progression must happen in space?
Click to expand...

Indeed. The reason planes won out over battleships at Sea, is because the two move through different mediums. (Water vs Air) In space, there is nothing to limit your speed or maneuverability other than the power of your engines and the durability of your hull.

The mightiest metal Titan of the stars can be as quick and nimble as a gunship, as long as it has the same proportions for fuel and thruster. (Although it would be far more expensive to maintain)
 
Yuri2356 said:
They travel much slower than the speed of light, they interact with one another (as demonstrated by the combining Death Star beam), and they are visible in vacuum.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. There is no vacuum in the Star Wars universe; if there were those space battles would be silent except for the views within the craft themselves. ;)

VRWCAgent said:
This, in my mind, is one of the biggest strikes against Star Trek; that universe is still stuck in the archaic "battleship" mindset. WWII demonstrated clearly that flattops are the rulers of the sea. The days of battlewagons slugging it out to determine naval dominance died at Jutland, with Letye Gulf being a final encore performance. Star Trek's vaunted Starfleet capital ships would be doomed in a fight with any of the other realities.
Click to expand...

What was the reason battleships lost their crown to carriers, what is it about aircraft that enabled this? The reliable delivery of weapons capable of defeating battleship armor while the carrier remained well out of range of battleship weapons. Or so it appears to someone that is not a military analyst. This may not be practical in the Star Trek universe.

Whatever. In the end I think the Star Wars universe is more neat and on that note I am off to play Star Wars: Battlefront 2. ;)
 
Yuri2356 said:
The mightiest metal Titan of the stars can be as quick and nimble as a gunship, as long as it has the same proportions for fuel and thruster. (Although it would be far more expensive to maintain)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't mass play a huge part here? Surely a small fighter would be far more agile and quicker to slow and accelerate than a huge battlewagon with a lot of mass, yes?

That said, I do acknowledge that BSG seems to have done a wonderful job of merging wonderfully powerful battlewagons with the carrier design as well.
 
VRWCAgent said:
Wouldn't mass play a huge part here? Surely a small fighter would be far more agile and quicker to slow and accelerate than a huge battlewagon with a lot of mass, yes?
Click to expand...
The larger ship will need to expend a lot more power and mass to turn, but it will also have more internal volume to hold the extra reactors and fuel. In addition to having more weapons, thicker armour, more scanners, bigger computers (to co-ordinate everything)

See here for more on the realism of space fighters.

That said, I do acknowledge that BSG seems to have done a wonderful job of merging wonderfully powerful battlewagons with the carrier design as well.
Click to expand...

No argument here. That ship is just plain Badass.
 
Mercenary82 said:
If we are talking about "Star Trek" and not just the Federation alone, then the Borg easily defeat anything from Star Wars. Imagine what happens when the Borg assimilate a Jedi and create a Super Borg who can control the force? Also due to the Borgs adaptation abilities, their ships will be practically invulnerable, they would easily assimilate the entire Empire and Rebel Alliance.
Click to expand...
True, and you cant even blow up a Borg Cube by tossing a bomb down a vent.
 
i see people talking star wars vs star treck. Does anyone watches Stargate ? I dont see how you can beat the Asgaard , the Ori and replicators (still no one talked about the Ancients). The death star takes some time to load. and what if it was overcome by replicators...it would make tons of replicators! and the borgs...what do they have to offer against the Asgaard vessels or Oris ?

anyway even with the force you just cant compete against the Ancients
 
You forget SG-1! SG-1 can defeat anything! I mean come on, those guys shoulda been dead like 50 bajillion times, but they ain't! They could take on anyone!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom