I have - or rather Omeganian has. He's used a completely different method - Stefan's law - to calculate it. Graham has extrapolated using the inverse square law. I could equally say Graham has disproved Omeganian. I don't particularly want to go through the maths - I've got another load of exams co...

In which case, Seafort must also proves Graham's are.

Eh, point, although I'd maintain that doesn't necessarily mean an equivalent increase in power output, rather than improved efficiency. Maybe, but if the end result is considerably more powerful in a non 'wattage' sense, it doesn't really matter. The NX is a lot closer to a warship than the GCS, my...

1) When I mentioned Little Boy I was talking about the yield rather than the technology - a weapon that small could be carried for a variety of reasons, from not wanting to be inside its lethal radius to needing a small weapon to fit the delivery vehicle. 2) Modern nukes aren't a few Mt - they're m...

How big a nuke? A Tsar Bomb or a Little Boy? At what range? IIRC it was a direct hit, but no one is going be able to hit a ship in space who only has the technology or wants to use a Little Boy. It probably wouldn't have been a Tsar Bomb, but I'd imagine it was approximately equal to todays ICBMs -...

Evidence? Warp 5 in NX, warp 9.975 in Voy? You could make the same claim looking at the weapons of the GCS and Defiant. Huge phaser arrays compared to tiny little cannons, and yet the Defiant 's weapons are equal to or stronger than those of a GCS. But the Defiant is a warship, the NX isn't. The de...

When? In Relics 1 Mt over three hours was expected to bring down the E-D's weakened shields. Assuming the weakening of shields is a linear progression, they should be able to withstand 4 Mt over that sort of time. The Tsar Bomb would destroy them easily. According to Graham's calculations (which ar...

Why? We've got plenty of evidence that technological progress in Trek is very slow - the E-D's impulse engines, for example, are probably the same basic design as the NX-01's. Impulse engines don't particularly require entire overhauls, though, because there is a limit based on the laws of physics ...

The UFP wouldn't have a problem with nukes - nevermind surface to air missiles. We've seen shields - even hulls - easily withstand far, far, far more than even the Tsar bomb could deal out. Easy tactic would be send a shuttle craft to every major governmental city/building and hold to ransom. I doub...

Yeah, conceded on the phaser sweep. Though now I have to wonder why the hell no one seems to use it in combat. Presumably keping it continuously firing for several seconds takes up a lot of the weapon's power. Possibly, but only on a kill setting. Turn it down to a heavy stun and then machine gun. ...

ting it was a full-strength shot. "Survivors" had 3 shots, 400 GW each, take down Enterprise's shields, thermal damage to the hull (outer surface melting?), and internal damage which caused loss of weapons control. (and at that point, the bridge crew should have lost bladder and bowel con...

At least gay men will know when their partner is lying in bed.

/oh no he didnnnn'!

So when faced with the remote chance of finding really a non-immediate life threatening being, they are able to machine gun. When faced with instant death, it's aim down the sights and shoot for a tenth of a second.

Anyone watch the QI where they talked about this? Supposedly the easiest way to tell is that your anal muscles contract when you lie. Pleasant.

Designing something poorly is one thing, but actually actively seeking ways to make it worse?! Anyway, as I am pretty sure Sisko did sweep, it's pretty irrelevant, which brings us to the original, normal conclusion: Trek technology is good, personnel are woeful.