Star Trek vs. Star Wars Tech

[BCphoton]

Hello all! Wanted to hear opinions as to if you feel the various technologies in Star Trek or Star Wars are more plausible. Granted, they are all long shots, but which makes more sense to you all?

 

For example, I feel that warp drive from Star Trek is more plausible than hyperspace in Star Wars.

 

Also, this is just intended for fun, so please don't get too heated!

[ajb]

I have not thought too hard about it, but for sure Star Wars has many basic physics flaws in it. Anyway, I an a Star Trek fan

[StringJunky]

I have not thought too hard about it, but for sure Star Wars has many basic physics flaws in it. Anyway, I an a Star Trek fan

Spock Roolz.

[BCphoton]

I have not thought too hard about it, but for sure Star Wars has many basic physics flaws in it. Anyway, I an a Star Trek fan

Same here! I love Star Trek. Which series is your favorite?

 

Spock Roolz.

\\ //_

[ajb]

Which series is your favorite?

Call me weird, but I quite liked the animated series.

[Sensei]

I have not thought too hard about it, but for sure Star Wars has many basic physics flaws in it. Anyway, I an a Star Trek fan

 

Watched (again) "Star Trek: Nemesis" this week, and while fight between starships there was sound (in vacuum). Doesn't count as "basic physics flaw" too.. ?

Not to mention teleportation all the time used by Star Trek team, while in Star Wars I don't recall teleportation.

[BCphoton]

Call me weird, but I quite liked the animated series.

I have never actually seen it myself, but honestly, I heard it was pretty bad. May have to give it a try sometime though

[dimreepr]

Call me weird, but I quite liked the animated series.

 

 

You're weird...

I’m a fan of both but I think Star trek has influenced science the most and, with the exception of ‘Q’, completely ignores the idea of a deity, whereas Star wars is based on a deity.

Edited April 27, 2016 by dimreepr

[BCphoton]

 

 

You're weird...

I’m a fan of both but I think Star trek has influenced science the most and, with the exception of ‘Q’, completely ignores the idea of a deity, whereas Star wars is based on a deity.

That is very true. I had actually not thought of it like that before!

[ajb]

Doesn't count as "basic physics flaw" too.. ?

It does... but I did not say that Star Trek does not have any flaws ;-)

 

 

I have never actually seen it myself, but honestly, I heard it was pretty bad.

It is different to the OS.

[Mordred]

I've always preferred star trek to star wars. In Star trek morality issues is more grey to define compared to light vs dark side.

 

On warp vs hyperdrive I would go for warp drive as it involves essentially a spacetime curvature scheme similar enough to the Alcubierre drive (theoretical).

Hyperdrive never seems to involve time dilation effects.

 

The lasers in star trek are slightly more realistic as a full length beam compared to the bullet like bursts in Star wars. Light sabers are completely unrealistic.

 

Though neither program completely follows true science.

 

Probably one of the more accurate programs though short lived was "Firefly". Really wish they had kept that series going,

[Prometheus]

Babylon 5 had some pretty believable tech: even rotating ship segments to simulate gravity and aliens that had to wear encounter suits in human created environments.

 

But Firefly would get my vote too: can't believe they pulled that - by far the best sci-fi show at the time.

[dimreepr]

Babylon 5 had some pretty believable tech: even rotating ship segments to simulate gravity and aliens that had to wear encounter suits in human created environments.

 

But Firefly would get my vote too: can't believe they pulled that - by far the best sci-fi show at the time.

 

 

As did/was 2001 a space odyssey.

Edited April 28, 2016 by dimreepr

[Prometheus]

2001 is in a league of it's own when it comes to being realistic. Apart from the fetus flying through space at the end maybe.

[dimreepr]

Apart from the fetus flying through space at the end maybe.

 

 

That bit, I think, was meant as a visual metaphor of that, latest, attempt at utopia.

[BCphoton]

Babylon 5 had some pretty believable tech: even rotating ship segments to simulate gravity and aliens that had to wear encounter suits in human created environments.

 

But Firefly would get my vote too: can't believe they pulled that - by far the best sci-fi show at the time.

Good points! I have to say the only two parts of Star Trek tech I think are totally implausible are the Intertial Dampners and Gravity Plating.