Khas 12,158 Posted September 29, 2010 BTW, this is simply spitballing. If the producers had used real words I'd have conceded. Actually, "gravitic" and "graviton" are real words. "Gravitic" means "powered by gravity", while a graviton is a theoretical particle of gravity. The graviton's existence is predicted by quantum mechanics, and is believed to be the conveyor of gravity on the subatomic scale. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted September 29, 2010 Never said Graviton wasn't a real word. I checked the unabridged dictionary behind my desk and online and only found sci-fi related references to Gravitic. BTW, the quantum mechanics graviton and the ST graviton bear absolutely zero relationship. And bringing in a theoretical particle that violates some parts of relativistic physics isn't going to help in this debate. That definition also doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Searching for that definition does turn up an entry for that definition, in a sci-fi dictionary. I'm going to assume that was a mistake rather than dishonest debating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted September 29, 2010 Ok, I do think we agree, but as always, we both like splitting hairs too much just to straight out admit it... Anyways, in essence, CGT not an insta detector, but cloaks are not a war-tipping technology in straigth up fights... That's my position, and I believe it is yours as well? I'd add some caveats regarding the utter useles of the CGT in any other circumstances, but pretty much. My guess is that a CGT could probably give you bearing pretty exactly, but range/mass would be a related function. I.E. An object might be closer and smaller or farther away and bigger. That last caveat assumes a stationary target. Anything moving at relativistic velocities will allow a lot of information leakage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted September 29, 2010 Never said Graviton wasn't a real word. I checked the unabridged dictionary behind my desk and online and only found sci-fi related references to Gravitic. BTW, the quantum mechanics graviton and the ST graviton bear absolutely zero relationship. And bringing in a theoretical particle that violates some parts of relativistic physics isn't going to help in this debate. That definition also doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Searching for that definition does turn up an entry for that definition, in a sci-fi dictionary. I'm going to assume that was a mistake rather than dishonest debating. Eh, I guess you're right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InvaderSkooj 1 Posted October 1, 2010 No, but Feds sensors have demonstrated many times their superiority vs the SW ones. Feds routinely do gravimatric scans and yet fail to detect cloaked ships even with these scans. Even if the SW sensors were as good as the Fed ones, since the Feds cannot detect ST cloaked ships, then it is logical to assume the same for SW sensors... And since they are cloaked and they cant detect them, how do they know that the cloaked ships are even in range of their gravimetric sensors. For all we know gravimetric sensors have a very short range Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted October 4, 2010 And since they are cloaked and they cant detect them, how do they know that the cloaked ships are even in range of their gravimetric sensors. For all we know gravimetric sensors have a very short range Could very well be, however, in order to be useful to completely cover the Romulan-Federation Neutral zone, short range needs to be a few LY each, and they still felt they needed the Tachyon detection grid for the Romulan fleet sneaking in Klingon territory, instead of the Gravimetric sensors used on the Romulan border... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted October 4, 2010 Could very well be, however, in order to be useful to completely cover the Romulan-Federation Neutral zone, short range needs to be a few LY each, and they still felt they needed the Tachyon detection grid for the Romulan fleet sneaking in Klingon territory, instead of the Gravimetric sensors used on the Romulan border... Or they could have been long range, low resolution, rather than having higher resolutions. Just because you know somethings out there, doesn't mean you can localize it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted October 4, 2010 Or they could have been long range, low resolution, rather than having higher resolutions. Just because you know somethings out there, doesn't mean you can localize it. Could be... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted October 5, 2010 Could be... Could be what? Too many Star Trek (and Star Wars) debators (my autocorrect put debacles there, which was funny enough that it deserved mentioning.) treat sensors like the magic map in Harry Potter. The real world doesn't work that way. There are generally trade offs. One of the most common in sensing devices is range/resolution. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted October 5, 2010 Could be what? Too many Star Trek (and Star Wars) debators (my autocorrect put debacles there, which was funny enough that it deserved mentioning.) treat sensors like the magic map in Harry Potter. The real world doesn't work that way. There are generally trade offs. One of the most common in sensing devices is range/resolution. Could be as in: It makes sense... But then, I could not say "It makes sense, thus it is", because we are, after all, talking about ST, where sensors are "like the magic map in Harry Potter" and work in no way like in the real world... Seriously, I like this explanation, and I think it makes the most sense... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted October 5, 2010 Could be as in: It makes sense... But then, I could not say "It makes sense, thus it is", because we are, after all, talking about ST, where sensors are "like the magic map in Harry Potter" and work in no way like in the real world... Seriously, I like this explanation, and I think it makes the most sense... Sorry, I've been spending to much time on another board. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted October 5, 2010 No Prob'... *Before you ask* No Prob' as in: I'm not offended, and I realized this was not your normal way of replying to me, so I tried to be as clear as possible in my following reply... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted October 6, 2010 Posrep for you... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted October 6, 2010 Questor? Using THOSE smilies? Has the world gone MAD? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted October 6, 2010 Questor? Using THOSE smilies? Has the world gone MAD? It's MAD! MAD I TELL YOU!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
