# Star Trek vs. Star Wars **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 16, 2004, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559 "2004-02-16T22:24:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/61 "2004-02-18T07:04:48Z")
I think you mean Dominion or Breen. The Cardassians were never anything more than the Italians to the Dominion’s Germany. ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/62 "2004-02-18T07:17:16Z")
For what it’s worth, quantum torpedoes have a charge of at least 50 Isotons making them, on the average, three times as powerful as photorps. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/63 "2004-02-18T07:41:29Z")
For comparison – assuming that my 1 isoton = 3.6 megatons formula is correct – the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a warhead of 0.0056 isotons. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/64 "2004-02-18T07:43:21Z")
(Which, I guess, would be 11.2 isopounds. 😛 ) ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/65 "2004-02-18T08:14:48Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > I think you mean Dominion or Breen. The Cardassians were never anything more than the Italians to the Dominion’s Germany. I dunno, I didn’t follow DS9 that closely. I do remember a Cardassian ship in one of those last episodes blowing a hole clean through a fully shielded enemy ship though. Couldn’t say what type the dead ship was, but I think the Cardassian ship was a [Hutet class.](http://www.geocities.com/shipyardsuk/cardasian) ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/66 "2004-02-18T20:44:53Z")
Huh. That ship class looks totally unfamiliar to me. It’s been four years since I’ve seen an episode of DS9 though. God damned TV execs not playing reruns. :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/67 "2004-02-18T21:22:01Z")
I’m surprised no one has yet mentioned the ultimate deal-breaker (what with the fact that we’re in different technological spheres here): The Star Wars universe is still using “lasers”. Unless there’s a manual somewhere that states that “lasers” aren’t actually “lasers”, anything in the ST universe with shields has nothing to worry about. But, it is true, that SW _used_ to beat ST in the coolness factor. Now that we have some crap movies out there though, I’d say that saying SW is cool because of Han Solo (who does rock the coolness meter off its socks) is like saying that ST is cool because of Q. One iota of coolness doth not a cool series make. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2004, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/68 "2004-02-18T21:44:04Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > Unless there’s a manual somewhere that states that “lasers” aren’t actually “lasers”, There is. _Star Wars: The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology_. Turbo “lasers” are actually higher-powered variants of the same technology that’s in an X-wing’s or Snowspeeder’s “blasters”. The planet-destroying beam fired from the Death Star is called a “superlaser”, and there’s no doubt that such a weapon would make short work out of any ship in the _Star Trek_ universe. (Of course, the Death Star would have to get into a position from which it could actually _shoot at_ the Trek starship in order for its superlaser to do any good. If the Trek ship stayed “behind” the Death Star – an easy feat to accomplish, given the Death Star’s lack of mobility – the Death Star could only shoot at the Trek ship with its plain old turbolaser batteries.) ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/69 "2004-02-19T05:20:01Z")
It’s just not as fun without \*\*SPOOFE \*\* giving us book titles and page numbers . ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/70 "2004-02-19T05:29:47Z")
He probably ran out of toothpaste. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/71 "2004-02-19T05:41:25Z")
Okay, **Clueless Lad** , I give up. What does running out of toothpaste have to do with failing to post _Star Wars_ book-chapter-and-verse references in an _ST vs. SW_ thread? ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/72 "2004-02-19T05:53:04Z")
I’m guessing he was implying that SPOOFE wanks to SW and [needs toothpaste](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=860395#post860395) to get the best results. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/73 "2004-02-19T05:57:08Z")
… 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Shortie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@Shortie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shortie)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/74 "2004-02-19T11:46:08Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > But, it is true, that SW _used_ to beat ST in the coolness factor. > > Now that we have some crap movies out there though, I’d say that saying SW is cool because of Han Solo (who does rock the coolness meter off its socks) is like saying that ST is cool because of Q. One iota of coolness doth not a cool series make. Ah, but the Clone Wars shorts brought the coolness factor right back up again. As to the overall debate, it really depends on just what you mean by SW vs ST. Obvously Q is kinda overmatch (unless you’ve got a magic musket. Don’t get me started on that ep…). Equally the C29th Feds or some of the freakier aliens out there would be a lot scarier than the TNG Feddies. Part of the problem is that things like firing at warp, ships with serious firepower and defences, and vaguely competent ground troops all existed back in Kirk’s day but have disappeared since. As to the whole laser thing, you’ll note that none of the weapons used in either series are lightspeed radiation. Thus, not really lasers. It’s just a cool name. ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2004, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/75 "2004-02-19T18:54:15Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > I’m surprised no one has yet mentioned the ultimate deal-breaker (what with the fact that we’re in different technological spheres here): > > The Star Wars universe is still using “lasers”. Star Trek captains like to scoff at lasers, but let’s look at this logically. Shields clearly have a finite capacity to absorb energy before failure, and in some cases the shield generators can be damaged before total failure occurs. Lasers are electromagnetic energy. Therefore, a powerful enough laser can defeat a Star Trek shield. It may be that in Trek, phasers were invented before extremely powerful lasers were developed, or it may be that such lasers are cost or size prohibitive. Even ignoring the fact that Star Wars “lasers” don’t act like real world lasers (that is, they take a perceptible amount of time to reach the target, they come in short bolts rather than a continuous beam, and they are visible from the side in space), they are extremely powerful. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/76 "2004-02-20T01:03:03Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > I’m guessing he was implying that SPOOFE wanks to SW and [needs toothpaste](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=860395#post860395) to get the best results. :eek: Remind me never, ever, **ever** to use toothpaste as a lubricant! ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2004, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/77 "2004-02-20T01:34:30Z")
Why would you \*need \* reminding? ---
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2004, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/78 "2004-02-22T06:58:21Z")
…It’s a little late, but I thought I might mention the semi-famed [Turbolaser Commentaries](http://www.stardestroyer.net/tlc/Power/index.html) page. The author of which has made some estimates about the power levels of the energy weapons used by Star Wars spacecraft. For example, he estimates that each laser blast from an X-Wing puts out about 600 Gigajoules of energy, and one of the turbolaser batteries onboard an ISD might put out 6700 terajoules per shot. Comparing this to the known power output of Starfleet shield generators and phaser banks might prove informative. ---
**Author:** ![sturmhauke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47c2d/32.png) [@sturmhauke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sturmhauke)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2004, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/79 "2004-02-27T18:57:29Z")
Ya know, I’ve watched a few episodes of TNG from my box sets lately, and it occurs to me that Trek tech isn’t very robust. They’re always losing the starboard power coupling, shields go offline all the time, etc. Maybe it’s because Trek battles are comparatively rare, they don’t have the experience to design proper warships. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2004, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559/80 "2004-02-27T20:40:28Z")
> [@sturmhauke](#): > > Trek tech isn’t very robust. They’re always losing the starboard power coupling, shields go offline all the time, etc. Yeah, but then they can turn around and reroute the quantum phase-modulated tachyon stream through the induced polarity emitter array, thereby establishing a charged solitonic polaron field within a static warp shell which will create a coherent burst of neutrino flux in the ambivulent bivationary falvebarms. Top **that** , Star Wars universe! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/star-trek-vs-star-wars/229559.md?page=5)