• greenknight333
    When talking about joules, I was under the impression that 1 joule = 0.239 calories so 269 joules would be in layman terms the amount of energy required to lift 269 apples a height of one meter..Now I am no physicist but at either 625 Joules or 269 joules neither of these weapons would pack any punch. Unless it was a punch in the face..

    Are you sure you were referring to joules..Megatons of power I can see but joules no way unless it was a terajoule(TJ) or bigger like exajoule(EJ), zettajoule(ZJ), oryottajoule(YJ)..
  • greenknight333
    Here is my reasoning for my statement above...


    1 gram of TNT = 4184 Joules
    1 tonne TNT = 909 kilograms TNT = 3,803,636,363 Joules

    So

    1 Megaton = 3,803,636,363 x 4.184×109 J which is a pretty freakin large number

    60,532,645,860,947,025,454,545,454,545 Joules

    which is roughly rounded

    6.05 x 10(28) Joules (that's lifting a lot of apples a lot higher than a meter) which is bigger than a yottajoule(YJ)

    Either way Galactica wins with roughly 2.5 times the punch of the Enterprises photon torpedoes.. Big bang is only a joke..
  • greenknight333
    The last portion of my last post was completely wrong since a megaton is 1000 times bigger than a kiloton so

    150 kilotons = 6.276 x 10(11) joules= a maximum galactica nuke

    65 Megatons = 2.677 x 10(14) joules = a photon torpedo

    SO the Enterprise would win this category too...Yeah Federation!!

    I hope this is all right and that my calculations are ok..Geez I'm a knob..
  • Ash Ali
    Screw the Enterprise D, set the Galactica against the far more powerful Enterprise-E. The ship that can take down Borg Cubes.
  • Great post Bruce,

    I didn't plan on reading the whole article but I did anyways, lol (at a hotel right now) but I have a few more points to raise.

    Any missiles or nukes the battlestar throws at a federation ship would be shot down instantly before even coming close to hitting the Enterprise...So that comparison is null, hehe.

    Also, Photo Torpedos move at warp speed and nothing could stop it from making impact. The power of that weapon would completely take out a battlestar in just a few hits.

    Phaser beams as seen on TNG era starships are 100% accurate and instantaneous. There's an episode of TNG where the Enterprise takes out over dozen smaller unshielded ships in less than a second.

    Obvious comparisons just from the shows makes the Enterprise win in every category - not too mention that the Federation ships can actually maneuver and travel fast - way faster than those rocket propelled nukes from BSG.

    BSG is completely primitive and antiquated in every form of tech compared to Trek so these 'who would win' scenarios end up the same. Trek also beats Star Wars for those who wonder.

    On that note and in the spirit of the fun of these - Here is the best Star Trek vs. Video of all time:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4ijDlbvAxw
  • Ash Ali
    There is one more thing you failed to mention. The Enterprises (especially D and E) have been self-sustaining. In terms of food or whatever they need, they just replicate. Whereas the Galactica relied on other ships for fuel, food, etc. The Star Trek ships can survive for much longer. I mean, just look at Voyager, some 7 years without direct help from Starfleet.
  • Rob
    Geeze - I wrote a massive response and it didn't show.

    Quick Summary of my intended post:

    *Missiles/Nukes from BSG ship can't hit a federation ship - that rocket propelled crap would be shot down instantaneously by phasers.

    *Photon torps move at warp speed therefore cant miss a BSG ship = WIN for Enterprise (again)

    *Fed ships can actually maneuver and move fast

    *shields

    *BSG tech primitive and antiquated in all ways from Trek. Trek wins as it would be Star Wars.


    For fun, here is the best Star Trek Vs. vid of all time. It is a MUST WATCH:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4ijDlbvAxw
  • Lee-Unit
    You know what would have been a better comparison; Galactica vs. the SDF-1 from Robotech. Then you'd have nukes vs. synchro-cannons, Vipers vs. Veritechs and spacefolds vs. FTL drives. And they are much closer together in scale. Try that one sometime.
  • These comparisons are fun, BUT, they can be tough to put together as one chases lots of information all over the net.

    Ya get cross eyed.

    That's a great idea Lee-Unit. They do seem closer in compatibility. I was focused on DVICE and their outcome, so I got tunnel focused!
  • NightWarp
    I dont think the weapon thing is fair, you compared the poewer of one weapon.. however.. how many nukes does BSG as? how many photon.. or quantum torpedoes does teh enterprise have? how fast can they shoot em? now you could get an idea of the destructive power.. The enterprise could simply shoot down those slow nuke missiles, while unleashing 10 or so torpedoe in one volley.. Enterprise D or E would make quick work of a battlestar.. i doubt ballistic weapon got much of a chance againts shields (however, nukes are another story)
  • David
    Kirk's ship took two up close hits from various nukes. Once when Balok's probe was destroyed and again when the Romulin commander hid one (used for self-destruction) in space debris. Both destroyed by phaser fire, both at close range. Balok's probe may not have been a bomb, but the Romulin's sure was and carried a real kick. Too many of those from Galactica get through the phasers and the Enterprise would be done for.

    Still, I think Galactica wouldn't stand a chance, as Greenknight pointed out, a couple photon torpedos, which totally out class Galactica's nukes, and it would be all over.

    Better yet, why not use the transporter to beam one on to Galactica and detonate it? Don't bother looking for survivors!
  • Stezz
    Just for a laugh, I'd love to see a Star Trek - The Next Generation & Doctor Who crossover. Just imagine what a Borg assimilated Dalek would be like. That is if the Borg could get close enough in the first place!
  • greenknight333
    What in the name of Mike happened to 790?
  • @greenknight

    Been wondering that myself. I think he probably migrated over the movie site that he writes for.

    Bummer. Been missing his comments. But it seems that Ken J has come in to fill the vacuum. :-P

    Vic
  • @Rob

    LOL, of all people you should know to just shoot me an email if one of your comments doesn't show up. :-P

    Vic
  • Robin707
    Depends on where the battle happens. If it happens in the space time continuim then Galactica wins hands down, since none of the enterprises technology works here.
    Star Trek is a sceinceFICTION show, ie. a fantasy set in the future. BSG is a SCEINCEfiction show, ie a work of fiction grounded in the real and explainable.
    All of the numbers for star trek are pulled out of thin air to satisfy the whims of the plot. Star trek isn't internally consistent while BSG is completely internally consistent. As a matter of fact barring a few points BSG is consistent with reality as we understand it.
    Galactica Versus Enterprise is as assinine and pointless as Who would win if Mohammed Alli and superman had a fight....
  • @Robin

    If it's so "assinine and pointless" then why bother to go to any trouble to even make your, um, point?

    And why wouldn't Trek tech work in the Galactica universe? It's the same universe. Oh, wait... why am I asking you a pointless question...

    8-)

    Vic
  • greenknight333
    @ RObin707

    Try Superman Vs Mohammed Ali a comic book from the fall of 1978 with Mohammed Ali defeating Supes a on planet with a red sun thereby reducing Superman to the class of mere mortal..Ali knocks him out.

    They should have "Scrubb"ed that idea...

    What you call assinine & pointless I call hypothetical fun and Bruce did mention in the article that it is just for fun...
  • cleantalkingchimp
    @Rob Keyes
    Trek also beats Star Wars for those who wonder.

    Do not under estimate the power of the Force!!
  • Thanks greenknight333.

    Indeed I did add the DISCLAIMER that this was fun, hence my THE FUN OF IT ALL heading.

    It's great point that as I think about it, it's a rather pointed statement that BSG is rooted in reality. No transporters, no phasers. Almost all equipment rooted in reality.

    But that FTL drive thingy drags them right into the same drawer of socks with the Trek-verse! Never mind cyborgs destroying humanity.

    And yes, I had not thought of it until after I wrote this post that it would be a 1 point game! Transport 1 nuke into the middle of the ship. Game over!

    Still, we don't mind all the different opinions. As long as you keep them on the subject matter and not toss barbs at the people. I mean heck, I didn't start this. I was just motivated.

    So say we all? So say some of us?
  • Robin707
    @ Vic
    umm... no it's not the same universe. Which is the whole point of my statement.
    The Star trek universe is one in which the location and vector of a subatomic particle can be known at the same time. Check the schemetics for the enterprise, there is a device known as "The Heisenberg negeiter".
    Whereas the BSG universe is one that is obeys the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. QED Not the same universe.
    Greenknight brought up the DC Superman Vs Ali comic. In this the critical question in determining the answer to who won that fight was where the fight happened. Which is exactly my point in Enterprise Vs BSG.
    The OP brought up Adama Vs Kirk. Kirk was trained by Starfleet, an exploritory agency akin to NASA. Adama has militery training. So i say that point goes to Adama. Stratagy and tatics trumps exploritory theory and Prime directive.
    As i said with a FEW EXCEPTIONS BSG uses real technology. They have CO2 scrubbers, whereas oxygen just happens on the enterprise, etc,etc. I find it a bit of a stretch to say that they are both in the same sock drawer as far as realism.
    I realise that this is all hypothetical, but the amount of research you put into points that support your argument makes me wonder at why you are quick you are to dismiss my refutation of them as being unfun...
  • Typhon
    Bruce:

    The comic scene was from a one-shot called Star Trek\X-Men (or vice versa). The alien who hit the ship was Gladiator from the Shiar race.
  • Derek
    Galactica launches nuke.... Enterprise locks on to it, beams it on the bridge of the Galactica. Battle over. Or, before that happens, Enterprise beams the Galactica bridge crew into space or the Enterprise Brig. (depending on your sensibilities) Not much of a fight I think.
  • nowhereman
    @ Rob Keyes

    OMG!!! I just fell out of my chair laughing at the enterprise crew’s reaction to “LASERS?”, and the way Picard cut Vader off in mid rant was classic! Just a really good fan made spoof! Thanks for the link, mate! J)


    @ Robin 707

    If you want facts about real world physics and how powerful either side would actually fare when existing technology is applied, then check this out….

    All I have to do is hit a button on my remote, and poof! All vessels cease to exist without my firing a single shot!
    Asinine, perhaps….but very effective, yes?
  • Jae Senn
    Robin,

    It's actually the Heisenberg Compensator. In fact, particle physicists are trying to do just that - to create new ways of detecting particles and measuring their quantities without perturbing their quantum state!

    As for warp drives, heck, that's in the works too, albeit theoretically. Negative energy densities and all.

    Impulse drive - it's a fusion reactor venting plasma out the rear end, and it's pretty efficient. Think microwave-excited plasma propulsion (something that's currently working with existing technology) and you'll see the early forms of impulse propulsion.

    Phasers are coherent plasma weapons. That's just like lasers, except that you use something with more momentum than photons, i.e. plasma. That's being developed in the real world too.

    Photon torpedoes use matter-antimatter and sadly, they won't explode the way they do in the movies because matter-antimatter reactions just produce plenty of radiation, not explosions. Nevertheless, a matter-antimatter reaction is 100% efficient while a thermonuclear bomb is only 0.5% efficient at best.

    Trek not taking place in this universe, but BSG is? The last time I checked, the speed of light still can't be exceeded and we still can't fold space or create wormholes or any other viable FTL capabilities. So I don't see how BSG takes place in this universe either..

    At the end of the day, they're both SCIENCE FICTION, with Trek more forward-looking than BSG.
  • Typhon: Thank you thank you thank you! My sanity is one step closer to staying even keeled!

    Funny options Derek. I like it.

    nowhereman: Your powers are insurmountable!! All franchise mythos should quake in fear of your abilities! Dang, so we, the viewing audience wins!
  • JohnnyDarkKnight
    Heres a Match Up The Millennium Falcon Vs. The NCC-1701
  • Jae Senn
    Millennium Falcon vs NCC-1701?

    Match 1: Kessel Run

    Millennium Falcon wins because it could get past all those black holes. NCC-1701 would have slingshot through time due to the lightspeed breakaway factor.

    Match 2: Klingons

    Enterprise wins (sort of) because it could put up a fight but had been set to self-destruct when the Klingon landing party has beamed aboard. Millennium Falcon would have been destroyed by the Bird of Prey from millions of miles away with photon torpedoes.
  • @Robin

    I was just ribbing you since you said it was a pointless comparison after you took the time to argue in favor of BSG. :-)

    Vic
  • Ken J
    Screw that, I vote for the Daedalus from Stargate, with Asgard shield technology and Naquada enhanced nuclear weapons... :-P

    OK, I'll shut up...
blog comments powered by Disqus