The Science of Star Trek vs the Magic of Star Wars - the 10 Year Flame War!

[Bluce Ree]

What you are not acknowledging is that Star Trek inspired the further work on warp drive theory. Just like it inspired the Bluetooth headset, the flip cellphone, the Tablet, flat screen displays, reconfigurable (menu driven) screens and even transparent aluminum (yes, it exists now).

Well, I'll be damned! I completely forgot about that!

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2015/11/transparent-aluminum/

We had posted about that a while ago. Few advances say "Star Trek" quite like transparent aluminum, which was completely made up and seemed like utter nonsense until it wasn't.

 

[heisenberg]

What you are not acknowledging is that Star Trek inspired the further work on warp drive theory. Just like it inspired the Bluetooth headset, the flip cellphone, the Tablet, flat screen displays, reconfigurable (menu driven) screens and even transparent aluminum (yes, it exists now). Star Wars cannot inspire science. No fake soapfi can, and neither can fantasy.



NASA is not the pinnacle of the scientific world dude. The best scientists are in the public sector, not at NASA wasting public resources on manmade global warming models or watching the private companies perform their paid experiments on the International Space Station which they only partially administer (and own). NASA does noit get to say what is possible or not. Only science does, and the best of science is not working at NASA.



I will not argue with anyone regarding transporters, but PERSONALLY, I think they are nonsense not because of the technology of disassembling matter in a controlled fashion and reassembling it, but because of the trans-physical properties of living beings like neuroelectric energy and the higher brain functions. I think that energizing the brain tissue would have the same effect as electrocution and that all existing neurochemical activity would be lost in the transport. That is just MY personal thought on it. The body NEVER gets a "reboot" from the moment of conception. It stays "on" continuously for the entire length of your life without ever really "rebooting". It only goes into a less active sleep state (forgive my computer thinking on this ). Transporting a being with a living brain would kill it IMO.



There it is. The red bolded marks you as somebody who really does not know or care about the differences. Relax, you are in the majority. Star Trek fans are way more picky, and about the same picky things we pick out in Star Trek. I don't always just want to be entertained. Sometimes I want to be challenged. Sometimes I want to be inspired. You can get all of that in Star Trek, but only entertainment from Star Wars. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily.

Erm...Not all public sector workers are LAZY, and wasting tax payer's money. They work just as hard as ordinary people. Not sure what NASA has done to you, but you seem to have a strong prejudice towards them.

 

[Overmind One]

Erm...Not all public sector workers are LAZY, and wasting tax payer's money. They work just as hard as ordinary people. Not sure what NASA has done to you, but you seem to have a strong prejudice towards them.

No, not really. But I am disillusioned with them since their mission changed (because of budget cuts). NASA was like real life Starfleet to me in an emotional sense. It's pinnacle was when we had 4 shuttles and were building the ISS and deploying space telescopes. Today, it is a mere shadow of what it was, being basically demoted to the night security guard job of keeping an eye on the other guy's shit in space. They are paid "managers" now. Today's NASA is in survival mode. It is finding creative ways to remain relevant, when we have a brand new SpaceX Research and Control Center which is technologically MORE ADVANCED than NASA Mission Control. It looks like this:

SpaceX is developing and building new launch systems, not NASA. China and Japan are offering more sophisticated tech in a smaller package on a cheaper launch vehicle than anything NASA can scrape together these days, so yeah, I have greatly revised my impression of NASA since those "real life Starfleet" days.

 

[Gatefan1976]

What you are not acknowledging is that Star Trek inspired the further work on warp drive theory. Just like it inspired the Bluetooth headset, the flip cellphone, the Tablet, flat screen displays, reconfigurable (menu driven) screens and even transparent aluminum (yes, it exists now). Star Wars cannot inspire science. No fake soapfi can, and neither can fantasy.

Erm.................
http://www.ibtimes.com/watch-darpas...rm-help-army-amputee-scale-wall-video-1814058
http://www.wired.com/2007/04/soldierportable/
Modern Robotics if far, far more influenced by the Droids of SW than anything from TOS era Trek.
People have been build a "lightsabre style" weapon for years.
But no, SW just can't Inspire anything.
Oh, and while we are at it, how this piece of fantasy come to life:
http://time.com/4042506/invisibility-cloak/

NASA is not the pinnacle of the scientific world dude. The best scientists are in the public sector, not at NASA wasting public resources on manmade global warming models or watching the private companies perform their paid experiments on the International Space Station which they only partially administer (and own). NASA does noit get to say what is possible or not. Only science does, and the best of science is not working at NASA.

Name me some non-NASA scientists that think that we are anywhere -near- having the capability to have the power containment to actually make a warp drive functional. (you know, the point that Yong was making before you started to waffle about unrelated topics to disprove his source)

I will not argue with anyone regarding transporters, but PERSONALLY, I think they are nonsense not because of the technology of disassembling matter in a controlled fashion and reassembling it, but because of the trans-physical properties of living beings like neuroelectric energy and the higher brain functions. I think that energizing the brain tissue would have the same effect as electrocution and that all existing neurochemical activity would be lost in the transport. That is just MY personal thought on it. The body NEVER gets a "reboot" from the moment of conception. It stays "on" continuously for the entire length of your life without ever really "rebooting". It only goes into a less active sleep state (forgive my computer thinking on this ). Transporting a being with a living brain would kill it IMO.

They are nonsense because the storage space needed to hold a pattern is -vast-, and that's just for starters.

There it is. The red bolded marks you as somebody who really does not know or care about the differences.

These two things are not the same.

Relax, you are in the majority. Star Trek fans are way more picky, and about the same picky things we pick out in Star Trek.

Not really, Warp drive is no more than theoretical, and chances are will stay that way, Transporters, just as bad, artificial gravity as seen in trek, bull. G Force compensation for rapid acceleration, bunk. Trek style shields, hocus pocus.
Relax though dude, you are in the majority of Trek fans who think it is more "realistic", because it -sounds- more realistic.

I don't always just want to be entertained. Sometimes I want to be challenged. Sometimes I want to be inspired. You can get all of that in Star Trek, but only entertainment from Star Wars. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily.

Hang on, you find Star Trek "challenging"?

 

[Overmind One]

View attachment 32399

Erm.................
http://www.ibtimes.com/watch-darpas...rm-help-army-amputee-scale-wall-video-1814058
http://www.wired.com/2007/04/soldierportable/
Modern Robotics if far, far more influenced by the Droids of SW than anything from TOS era Trek.
People have been build a "lightsabre style" weapon for years.
But no, SW just can't Inspire anything.
Oh, and while we are at it, how this piece of fantasy come to life:
http://time.com/4042506/invisibility-cloak/

LMAO! That is a huge huge stretch GF! Star Wars droids are cartoon characters come to life. Droids in science fiction were around even before I was born in 1960. In Star Wars, they have personalities and a sense of humor and mostly we only see them beeping and rolling and being cute. Nothing scientific about them, sorry! Han Solo is smart not to need or have one. Science simply does not allow for anything like a lightsaber. That one is a definite impossibility and a fantasy trope belonging only to Star Wars. AND even if one could be made, it would be a useless and pointless weapon like all swords are today. And there will never be an invisibility cloak. That one in Harry Potter is magical and has no science.

AGAIN: If you do not know much science, you cannot understand why there will never be a lightsaber. or why the droids in Star Wars are not at all like robots being designed in real life to do real work. What Star Wars inspires is TOYS which is why it was made in the first place.

Name me some non-NASA scientists that think that we are anywhere -near- having the capability to have the power containment to actually make a warp drive functional. (you know, the point that Yong was making before you started to waffle about unrelated topics to disprove his source)

Warp theory is nowhere near that stage. The principle of warp drive itrself is hard science and nobody is thinking about power containment. You have to develop the principle before you can start talking about power sources or containment (maybe the real thing won't need any containment or antimatter) You just are doing what you fantasy guys do...ignoring the science and getting right to the props.

They are nonsense because the storage space needed to hold a pattern is -vast-, and that's just for starters.

Patterns are the problem? Nope. Each and every one of is is storing trillions upon trillions of copies of our individual patterns in our DNA. The body is simply the build out. The patterns are stored in DNA. The problem with transporters and what makes them nonsense (to me) is the notion that neuroelectrochemical impulses can be transported safely by using a matter disintegrator. I personally do not think that there will ever be anything like the transporters seen in Star Trek.

These two things are not the same.

??? You said that in response to this?: "Both movies/shows are imaginary, works of fiction.Most importantly, they are forms of entertainment and diversion-nothing more". Not making much sense...the response that is, given the context.

Not really, Warp drive is no more than theoretical, and chances are will stay that way, Transporters, just as bad, artificial gravity as seen in trek, bull. G Force compensation for rapid acceleration, bunk. Trek style shields, hocus pocus.
Relax though dude, you are in the majority of Trek fans who think it is more "realistic", because it -sounds- more realistic.

You cannot separate the impossibilities from the possiblities because you are not a fan of science. Warp drive is theoretical and it's principles (so far) are scientific. You are whining about power containment and you do not realize that the basic warp principle has to be developed before any power requirements or other hardware is designed to allow for it to be applied. There may never be a need to use plasma or antimatter or have a warp core to achieve it. If you are unfamiliar with certain scientific principles, you will never be able to determine what is in the realm of possibility (scientifically speaking).

Star Wars fans are fantasy lovers, and for them EVERYTHING is possible because they do not know the science which makes most of it impossible. They do not see a disconnect between reality and fantasy because Star Wars makes beeping, sentient, mischievous droids real. It shows us robots telling jokes to each other and vehicles that float even when parked. It shows us magical forces which allow a significant portion of the population to make things float, move or otherwise be moved by the mind

Hang on, you find Star Trek "challenging"?

Many of the concepts, hell yes! Particularly the basis for some of the civilizations we have seen in the series. But much of the science presents challenges to theory in real life across many disciplines. But again...if you are not a fan of hard science, how could you know that?

 

[Bluce Ree]

View attachment 32399

Erm.................
http://www.ibtimes.com/watch-darpas...rm-help-army-amputee-scale-wall-video-1814058

Erm..............

The 6 Million Dollar Man, launched in 1973, or 7 years before Luke lost his hand and gets a cybernetic prosthesis. Making a reference to the 6 million dollar man would be too obscure.

You know as well as anyone else that the media will usually draw reference against the most hyped sci-fi at the time of publishing when they report on tech, right?

http://www.wired.com/2007/04/soldierportable/
Modern Robotics if far, far more influenced by the Droids of SW than anything from TOS era Trek.

Now you're just drawing your own conclusions. Asimov has had far more influence on robotics than any other sci-fi or sci-fantasy creator.

People have been build a "lightsabre style" weapon for years.

Lightsaber-style weapons? Where?

But no, SW just can't Inspire anything.

Oh, and while we are at it, how this piece of fantasy come to life:
http://time.com/4042506/invisibility-cloak/

Are you implying that cloaking was inspired by SW? Because it existed in TOS and in endless magical stories from generations before that.

 

[Bluce Ree]

And there will never be an invisibility cloak. That one in Harry Potter is magical and has no science.

Well ...

 

[Overmind One]

Well ...

Wow.......close enough!

 

[Overmind One]

Erm..............

The 6 Million Dollar Man, launched in 1973, or 7 years before Luke lost his hand and gets a cybernetic prosthesis. Making a reference to the 6 million dollar man would be too obscure.

You know as well as anyone else that the media will usually draw reference against the most hyped sci-fi at the time of publishing when they report on tech, right?



Now you're just drawing your own conclusions. Asimov has had far more influence on robotics than any other sci-fi or sci-fantasy creator.



Lightsaber-style weapons? Where?



Are you implying that cloaking was inspired by SW? Because it existed in TOS and in endless magical stories from generations before that.

Many of the folks who are younger have no concept of what tech was like before the 1990s. How ironic that Star Trek inspired some of the most important elements of the "tech revolution" which exist today. Captain Kirk was signing off on reports handed to him on the very first tablet-type device (with stylus) ever seen on TV...in 1967:

And the flip phone, wireless headpiece, giant viewscreens, flat panel displays and so many other devices and ideas have come from Trek. Star Wars cannot do any of that. Sure, it can inspire me to make my trash can look like R2D2....

 

[Gatefan1976]

Erm..............

The 6 Million Dollar Man, launched in 1973, or 7 years before Luke lost his hand and gets a cybernetic prosthesis. Making a reference to the 6 million dollar man would be too obscure.

You know as well as anyone else that the media will usually draw reference against the most hyped sci-fi at the time of publishing when they report on tech, right?

Of course I do, Which is why I find all this "look what Trek has inspired" the garbage that it is. Space flight, FTL, Shields, communicators etc etc, ALL this stuff that OM keeps saying is "inspired by trek" -all existed- in Sci fi books long before trek. Trek certainly -did- inspire some of the engineers and scientists to go into their fields and try to make what they saw on screen a reality, -but so did Star Wars-. That is my point Bluce, You cannot claim that "V" tech" was inspired by Y alone and conveniently ignore that W and X existed before it and Z is a contemporary. Now, before you say "that's what you did in ignoring the 6M dollar man", I know I did, I understand that, OM seems not to.

Now you're just drawing your own conclusions. Asimov has had far more influence on robotics than any other sci-fi or sci-fantasy creator.

ALL this discussion is about is people drawing their own conclusions, especially OM. "trek made it so, X would not exist without trek", BULLSHIT! All that is, is exactly what you said, people hanging it on the most well known sci fi of the day.

Lightsaber-style weapons? Where?

Never seen people try to make a "real world" lightsabre?
They are nothing like what they are in SW, but then again, Warp drive isn't exactly how it is portrayed in trek either, so..........

Are you implying that cloaking was inspired by SW? Because it existed in TOS and in endless magical stories from generations before that.

No, I was referring to those fantasy stories, you know, those stories that can't inspire scientists to do anything (but if they did, they were copying a personal Romulan cloaking device dammit, not the one from 1000 Arabian nights, or Harry Potter!!

 

[Gatefan1976]

LMAO! That is a huge huge stretch GF! Star Wars droids are cartoon characters come to life. Droids in science fiction were around even before I was born in 1960. In Star Wars, they have personalities and a sense of humor and mostly we only see them beeping and rolling and being cute. Nothing scientific about them, sorry! Han Solo is smart not to need or have one. Science simply does not allow for anything like a lightsaber. That one is a definite impossibility and a fantasy trope belonging only to Star Wars. AND even if one could be made, it would be a useless and pointless weapon like all swords are today. And there will never be an invisibility cloak. That one in Harry Potter is magical and has no science.

Do you know how -easy- it is to tell when you don't read links?

AGAIN: If you do not know much science, you cannot understand why there will never be a lightsaber. or why the droids in Star Wars are not at all like robots being designed in real life to do real work. What Star Wars inspires is TOYS which is why it was made in the first place.

Blah blah "you just don't get it", you are not a real fan blah blah crap.

Warp theory is nowhere near that stage. The principle of warp drive itrself is hard science and nobody is thinking about power containment. You have to develop the principle before you can start talking about power sources or containment (maybe the real thing won't need any containment or antimatter) You just are doing what you fantasy guys do...ignoring the science and getting right to the props.

No, actually I am reading what physicists are saying now.
And more blah blah you don't get it crap.

Patterns are the problem? Nope. Each and every one of is is storing trillions upon trillions of copies of our individual patterns in our DNA. The body is simply the build out. The patterns are stored in DNA. The problem with transporters and what makes them nonsense (to me) is the notion that neuroelectrochemical impulses can be transported safely by using a matter disintegrator. I personally do not think that there will ever be anything like the transporters seen in Star Trek.

I am talking about the computing and storage power to hold -us- and transport us, like ST, which includes maintaining our brain and it's unique patterns.
ST transporter, it's magic

??? You said that in response to this?: "Both movies/shows are imaginary, works of fiction.Most importantly, they are forms of entertainment and diversion-nothing more". Not making much sense...the response that is, given the context.

err, no I did not.

You cannot separate the impossibilities from the possiblities because you are not a fan of science. Warp drive is theoretical and it's principles (so far) are scientific. You are whining about power containment and you do not realize that the basic warp principle has to be developed before any power requirements or other hardware is designed to allow for it to be applied. There may never be a need to use plasma or antimatter or have a warp core to achieve it. If you are unfamiliar with certain scientific principles, you will never be able to determine what is in the realm of possibility (scientifically speaking).

Blah blah blah you just don't get it, again.
I need to find you a good gif for that.

Star Wars fans are fantasy lovers, and for them EVERYTHING is possible because they do not know the science which makes most of it impossible. They do not see a disconnect between reality and fantasy because Star Wars makes beeping, sentient, mischievous droids real. It shows us robots telling jokes to each other and vehicles that float even when parked. It shows us magical forces which allow a significant portion of the population to make things float, move or otherwise be moved by the mind

Ho hum............

Many of the concepts, hell yes! Particularly the basis for some of the civilizations we have seen in the series. But much of the science presents challenges to theory in real life across many disciplines. But again...if you are not a fan of hard science, how could you know that?

Well yes, I could see how some of the civilizations would stump you.
As for the rest, just more blah blah you don't get it tripe, like most of this post.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Well ...

Well, I am glad at least one person went out and looked for the invisible thing

 

[YJ02]

Well, I'll be damned! I completely forgot about that!

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2015/11/transparent-aluminum/

We had posted about that a while ago. Few advances say "Star Trek" quite like transparent aluminum, which was completely made up and seemed like utter nonsense until it wasn't.

But it doesn't state the the show/movie(s) of ST are responsible for this invention.

Are we going to start crediting George Jetson for stuff next?

 

[YJ02]

Well ...

"Special fabric--no power source"

hey! Frodo had one of those!

Bam!! LOTR's is now officially tech inspiring!!

 

[YJ02]

No, not really. But I am disillusioned with them since their mission changed (because of budget cuts). NASA was like real life Starfleet to me in an emotional sense. It's pinnacle was when we had 4 shuttles and were building the ISS and deploying space telescopes. Today, it is a mere shadow of what it was, being basically demoted to the night security guard job of keeping an eye on the other guy's shit in space. They are paid "managers" now. Today's NASA is in survival mode. It is finding creative ways to remain relevant, when we have a brand new SpaceX Research and Control Center which is technologically MORE ADVANCED than NASA Mission Control. It looks like this:

View attachment 32397 View attachment 32398

SpaceX is developing and building new launch systems, not NASA. China and Japan are offering more sophisticated tech in a smaller package on a cheaper launch vehicle than anything NASA can scrape together these days, so yeah, I have greatly revised my impression of NASA since those "real life Starfleet" days.

not to mention the Obama admin's partial repurposing of NASA for "global climate change studies"

yes SPACEX and the others (Amazon's Bezos' company as well as others) will more then likely be the future of actual space exploration/progress

that will lead to the monetization and corporate ownership of the solar system--like inTHE EXPANSE

 

[Gatefan1976]

not to mention the Obama admin's partial repurposing of NASA for "global climate change studies"

yes SPACEX and the others (Amazon's Bezos' company as well as others) will more then likely be the future of actual space exploration/progress

that will lead to the monetization and corporate ownership of the solar system--like inTHE EXPANSE

But corporations won't exist in the future, I just can't see it, it will be like Star Trek!!

 

[Bluce Ree]

Never seen people try to make a "real world" lightsabre?
They are nothing like what they are in SW, but then again, Warp drive isn't exactly how it is portrayed in trek either, so..........

Not really a good comparison. The "lightsabers" you're talking about are nothing but thick lasers. Just because it shoots a fat laser beam out of a flashlight-shaped thing doesn't make it a saber. By your criteria, any cylindrical object shooting a beam of light would technically be a "lightsaber". Nice try, though.

 

[Bluce Ree]

But it doesn't state the the show/movie(s) of ST are responsible for this invention.

Are we going to start crediting George Jetson for stuff next?

Name one other show or movie prior to ST where transparent aluminum was mentioned.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Not really a good comparison. The "lightsabers" you're talking about are nothing but thick lasers. Just because it shoots a fat laser beam out of a flashlight-shaped thing doesn't make it a saber. By your criteria, any cylindrical object shooting a beam of light would technically be a "lightsaber". Nice try, though.

You mean like, any form of propulsion that could achieve a "warped space" effect is really a ST warp drive?
I did not set the criteria in this discussion dude, I am just going with the flow.
Nice try though

 

[Overmind One]

not to mention the Obama admin's partial repurposing of NASA for "global climate change studies"

yes SPACEX and the others (Amazon's Bezos' company as well as others) will more then likely be the future of actual space exploration/progress

that will lead to the monetization and corporate ownership of the solar system--like inTHE EXPANSE

Corporations are going to become socialist entities like the Bureaus are in the US government. Capitalism cannot work without expanding and the peoples of the (today) Third World like South America, Africa and to a great degree...China, will not support and perpetuate the Capitalist system. The type of system I see in the Expanse is a trope to me. It assumes that the future will run on the values and principles which run today's society when today's society is giving way to something much more fair and balanced (socialism and communism). Thinking that a biased and unbalanced system like Capitalism is going to be perpetuated by those who have been oppressed by it is sorta naive. It's like assuming that slaves would voluntarily perpetuate the system which enslaves them.