JThompson Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Scoring: T1 - Burned up - 2A T2 - Burned up - 2A T3 - Burned up - 2A PP1 - Burned hole but did not fall - 1M Doug We would have to put NS targets behind everything and use them for berms as well.... cause we all know they are impenetrable!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el pres Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 (edited) ... and impossible to hold on to to the point of killing the shooter also. equal and opposite. Photons do not have mass, so there is no equal and opposite. Photons do have heat energy though and can/do impart that heat on objects, so you could have a beam cook something without any recoil. Uhhhhh ?? E=MC2 ??? The concept of mass–energy equivalence unites the concepts of conservation of mass and conservation of energy, allowing rest mass to be converted to forms of active energy (such as kinetic energy, heat, or light). Conversely, active energy in the form of kinetic energy or radiation can be converted to particles which have rest mass. Edited February 9, 2009 by DIRTY CHAMBER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 ... and impossible to hold on to to the point of killing the shooter also. equal and opposite. Photons do not have mass, so there is no equal and opposite. Photons do have heat energy though and can/do impart that heat on objects, so you could have a beam cook something without any recoil. Uhhhhh ?? E=MC2 ??? The concept of mass–energy equivalence unites the concepts of conservation of mass and conservation of energy, allowing rest mass to be converted to forms of active energy (such as kinetic energy, heat, or light). Conversely, active energy in the form of kinetic energy or radiation can be converted to particles which have rest mass. NASA Do photons have mass? Because the equations E=mc2, and E=hf, imply that m=hf/c2 . Is it so? The Answer No, photons do not have mass, but they do have momentum. The proper, general equation to use is E2 = m2c4 + p2c2 So in the case of a photon, m=0 so E = pc or p = E/c. On the other hand, for a particle with mass m at rest (i.e., p = 0), you get back the famous E = mc2. This equation often enters theoretical work in X-ray and Gamma-ray astrophysics, for example in Compton scattering where photons are treated as particles colliding with electrons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Guys, This has been an interesting discussion but I just looked in the rule book and Appendix D(1-6)-4 says: 4 Minimum bullet caliber / cartridge case length .38 cal. / 9x19 mm (0.354” x 0.748”) We will need some relatively big-ass photons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Ho Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Guys,This has been an interesting discussion but I just looked in the rule book and Appendix D(1-6)-4 says: 4 Minimum bullet caliber / cartridge case length .38 cal. / 9x19 mm (0.354” x 0.748”) We will need some relatively big-ass photons... Since typical bullet is made of sub-atomic particles, I don't think this rule would apply. I think the beam would have to be at least 9mm. The rulebook does not state that the projectile must have a certain density. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Guys,This has been an interesting discussion but I just looked in the rule book and Appendix D(1-6)-4 says: 4 Minimum bullet caliber / cartridge case length .38 cal. / 9x19 mm (0.354” x 0.748”) We will need some relatively big-ass photons... Since typical bullet is made of sub-atomic particles, I don't think this rule would apply. I think the beam would have to be at least 9mm. The rulebook does not state that the projectile must have a certain density. You are correct sir, we will need a shit-load of little-ass photons. How is "bullet caliber" measured? I still have a feeling that Heisenberg thing may bite us in the butt again, though. Rule does not list any probability of caliber. It seems absolute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I think that us trying to define a phaser's scientific characteristics is like 1600 AD scholars trying to explain the principles of a nuclear explosion they just witnessed. Science sufficiently advanced is as magic to those who don't understand it...... I'm sticking with Phasers shoot Rapid Nadions and are undefinable by current science, or any photon/speed of light discussions. It is what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 "kill=major, stun=minor..." I was kinda thinking along those lines myself. I also sense that destruction of the chrono would be a serious consideration...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I think we should institute a PPD (Provisional Phaser Division) and see how things play out for a couple of light years. I am sure that Gary would back us on this. But, we have to promise to stay away from them magnetic mag holders. PPD Snobs, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin c Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I think we should institute a PPD (Provisional Phaser Division) and see how things play out for a couple of light years. I am sure that Gary would back us on this. But, we have to promise to stay away from them magnetic mag holders. PPD Snobs, anyone? I'm for it ONLY if I can modify the trigger, upgrade the dilithium crystal power unit, and alter the phased array rectifier (after all, the trigger is just a friggen button, and everything else is internal...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) I think we should institute a PPD (Provisional Phaser Division) and see how things play out for a couple of light years. I am sure that Gary would back us on this. But, we have to promise to stay away from them magnetic mag holders. PPD Snobs, anyone? I'm for it ONLY if I can modify the trigger, upgrade the dilithium crystal power unit, and alter the phased array rectifier (after all, the trigger is just a friggen button, and everything else is internal...). sounds fine as long as we avoid those magnetic containment things. We need Gary on board this project! ETA: The stun-minor / kill-major scheme is not negotiable. That is the corner stone of the PPD! (No grip tape on that button tho...) Edited February 10, 2009 by ChuckS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajarrel Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 did you guys ever notice that every time Kirk told a landing party to put their phasers on stun, one or more of them (except Kirk or other major character) ended up dead. Me....I'm staying on vaporize and burnin' 'em down I'd just say the selector switch broke. dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Mainus Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I can't believe I just read through 36 post of the PF of a Star Trek phaser Don't you guys have to go dry fire or something. Somebody owes me 5 minutes of my life back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin c Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) ...did you guys ever notice that every time Kirk told a landing party to put their phasers on stun, one or more of them (except Kirk or other major character) ended up dead. Me....I'm staying on vaporize and burnin' 'em down I'd just say the selector switch broke. Sounds perilously close to an AD there. You better be able to prove the selector was broken. You'll be lucky to just zero the stage... Edited February 10, 2009 by kevin c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 did you guys ever notice that every time Kirk told a landing party to put their phasers on stun, one or more of them (except Kirk or other major character) ended up dead. Me....I'm staying on vaporize and burnin' 'em down I'd just say the selector switch broke. dj NEVER, EVER wear a RED SHIRT on an away team!!! If you do, UR Toast! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisStock Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Or a power factor of 13,717,872 Sounds about right. But it would be tough to score if you vaporized all the targets. no arguing those perfect doubles either...hmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Or a power factor of 13,717,872 Sounds about right. But it would be tough to score if you vaporized all the targets. no arguing those perfect doubles either...hmmmm Not so fast. Remember, there is aways a trace of a phaser discharge. Doubles may be easy to disprove in the PPD compared to the other divisions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Tom is right, I am going to go dry fire. Chuck, out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I can't believe I just read through 36 post of the PF of a Star Trek phaser Don't you guys have to go dry fire or something. Somebody owes me 5 minutes of my life back I was there when they started breaking out the heavy snort laugh math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Hayden Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 NEVER, EVER wear a RED SHIRT on an away team!!! If you do, UR Toast! Alwyas make sure they refer to you by name.. just "Ensign".. you're toast... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) self-edit Edited February 10, 2009 by Carmoney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Not so far out... http://www.raytheon.com/newsroom/feature/ads_03-08/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Ellis Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 3-gun will be alive and well. Phasor rifles were often seen. In the pilot for Enterprise a farmer blasted a Klingon with a OU pulsed weapon. Didn't kill him but left a nasty hole. Should have used buckshot pulses instead of birdshot pulses. Wasn't impressed with the velocity of the load either. When you can see the load going downrange it ain't going fast enough. Lock time is probably pretty good however. Heavy Metal will probably go away however. I mean when there is no recoil whether running Major or Minor and the only difference between Major rifle from Minor rifle is whether the whole popper or just the calibration area of the popper is vaporized to a slag heap, what's the point? Maybe the vaporizing models were seen as a warcrime and so the intergalactic NATO types banned them ???I remember one episode where the bad guy was a collector of the most rare things in the universe. One item was an unopened Mickey Mantle bubble gun package. Another was a Romulan disruptor that was banned by treaty as being too inhumane. Slow, painful tearing apart of your molecules.Dug around and found out that it was a Varon-T disruptor made illegal by the Federation. Gun bans in the 23rd Century. Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Smith Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 One solution to the target problem would be to use Tribble Poppers (patent pending). They are cheap to reproduce and come in a variety of sizes and colors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 One solution to the target problem would be to use Tribble Poppers (patent pending). They are cheap to reproduce and come in a variety of sizes and colors. I can see the WSB: Welcome to stage 4 "The Trouble with Tribbles". Stage 4 consisits of 18 Tribble Poppers, er, 36 Tribble Poppers, uh, 72 Tribble Poppers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now