152 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth_Ultima]

TornadoADV wrote...

Radiaton? They are machines. Last time I checked radiaton only hurts living things.

Radiation degrades everything that isn't a rock or a lump of lead. Try taking your Home PC onto the Space Shuttle with you and see how long it lasts before being completely destroyed circuitry wise. When a nuclear weapon goes off in space, it's akin to getting illuminated by a Quasar.

Well Troll maybe I could borrow your Space shuttle.

[FRSHPRNFILL]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

[Darth_Ultima]

FRSHPRNFILL wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

Your right that this whole argument is patheticly stupid.  And I am ashamed to be a part of it.

[TornadoADV]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Do you even know what a Kilo is? It stands for 1,000, a Kiloton is 1,000 Tons. So a 23 Kiloton warhead has the explosive effect of 23,000 tons of TNT. The B41, the largest nuclear weapon produced by the US, is 25 Megatons or 25,000,000 tons of TNT. As you can see, a B41 is 3 measures of magnitude more powerful then the Fat Man. (25,000,000 compared to 16,000.)

Also, no ships could be directly hit in the test BECAUSE THE DEVICE WAS DETONATED UNDERWATER. I may not have a Ph.D, but at least I not only passed 3rd grade math, but also high school history.

Well Troll maybe I could borrow your Space shuttle.

http://thayer.dartmo...ssingham_99.pdf

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

A fair point, we haven't made it a habit to create large, armor piercing nuclear weapons, mostly because any target you can think of can simply be flattened, melted or irradiated instead.

Modifié par TornadoADV, 13 décembre 2010 - 01:04 .

[OnionMan26]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Actually, before you go calling others a moron, stop and think about what you just typed...

Battleships are made largely of steel, the melting point of steel is is around 1300 degrees centigrade (~2300 F).
The centre of the fireball created by a nuclear explosion, in the case of a fusion bomb, is several million degrees, even talking small, Little Boys centre was ~299000 degrees c, the immediate area around the fireball rose to about 5000 degrees C

As one for calling others morons, please do tell how a ship, made largely of steel, is going to survive such temperatures? I'll save you the hard work, a ship directly hit by the warhead would be vaporised, as in no longer anything left of it, no wreckage, no ash nothing. So no, a ww2 battleship would not survive a direct hit. In fact, in one US test the small island they detonated on was pretty much no more afterwards.

They were underwater explosions, and the ships that survived surface tests where not directly hit by the warheads.

Nukes would not make good weapons in Mass Effect for several reasons
1) Fairly sure the reapers have all they need to take out the large missiles needed to carry the rather large warheads...
2) Ditto for space weapons, way to slow to guarantee a hit as you would need a direct hit to damage the ship...a nuclear explosion 10k from a ME warship would = pretty fireworks and not much else. 
3) Radiation they produce means nothing. You have to remember these ships are intergalactic vessels, space itself has pretty nasty radiation to begin with so any ship that travels in space is going to be pretty well shielded from radiation

Modifié par OnionMan26, 13 décembre 2010 - 01:20 .

[TornadoADV]

OnionMan26 wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Actually, before you go calling others a moron, stop and think about what you just typed...

Battleships are made largely of steel, the melting point of steel is is around 1300 degrees centigrade (~2300 F).
The centre of the fireball created by a nuclear explosion, in the case of a fusion bomb, is several million degrees, even talking small, Little Boys centre was ~299000 degrees c, the immediate area around the fireball rose to about 5000 degrees C

As one for calling others morons, please do tell how a ship, made largely of steel, is going to survive such temperatures? I'll save you the hard work, a ship directly hit by the warhead would be vaporised, as in no longer anything left of it, no wreckage, no ash nothing. So no, a ww2 battleship would not survive a direct hit. In fact, in one US test the small island they detonated on was pretty much no more afterwards.

They were underwater explosions, and the ships that survived surface tests where not directly hit by the warheads.

Nukes would not make good weapons in Mass Effect for several reasons
1) Fairly sure the reapers have all they need to take out the large missiles needed to carry the rather large warheads...
2) Ditto for space weapons, way to slow to guarantee a hit as you would need a direct hit to damage the ship...a nuclear explosion 10k from a ME warship would = pretty fireworks and not much else. 
3) Radiation they produce means nothing. You have to remember these ships are intergalactic vessels, space itself has pretty nasty radiation to begin with so any ship that travels in space is going to be pretty well shielded from radiation

1.) You switch out the Eezo warheads of the Javelins for Nuclear Warheads. So if you could slip a Javelin through what we can assume is a Reaper's GARDIAN like defenses (If they have them, all their weapons seem focused on their tentacles rather then their shell.) you can deliever a nuclear warhead.

2.) Javelin missiles are slow because of their radically increased mass from their mass effect fields that let them bull through opposing kinetic barriers. A Nuclear missile could go as fast as you want it to go, hell, you could turn a mass driver round into an encased nuclear warhead and just fire it at the Reaper.

3.) Radiation means a lot around stars, it's the primary reason for incredibly short battles close to them (thermal radiation and gamma radiation). A nuclear bomb is almost pure hard gamma rays, a literal quasar or pulsar. If the EMP doesn't weaken the target's electronics due to logical hardening, the wave of punishing hard gamma will do the trick.

[Darth_Ultima]

TornadoADV wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Do you even know what a Kilo is? It stands for 1,000, a Kiloton is 1,000 Tons. So a 23 Kiloton warhead has the explosive effect of 23,000 tons of TNT. The B41, the largest nuclear weapon produced by the US, is 25 Megatons or 25,000,000 tons of TNT. As you can see, a B41 is 3 measures of magnitude more powerful then the Fat Man. (25,000,000 compared to 16,000.)

Also, no ships could be directly hit in the test BECAUSE THE DEVICE WAS DETONATED UNDERWATER. I may not have a Ph.D, but at least I not only passed 3rd grade math, but also high school history.

Well Troll maybe I could borrow your Space shuttle.

http://thayer.dartmo...ssingham_99.pdf

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

A fair point, we haven't made it a habit to create large, armor piercing nuclear weapons, mostly because any target you can think of can simply be flattened, melted or irradiated instead.

You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.

The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

Modifié par Darth_Ultima, 13 décembre 2010 - 01:46 .

[Giantevilhead]

Darth_Ultima wrote...
You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.

The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

[TornadoADV]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Do you even know what a Kilo is? It stands for 1,000, a Kiloton is 1,000 Tons. So a 23 Kiloton warhead has the explosive effect of 23,000 tons of TNT. The B41, the largest nuclear weapon produced by the US, is 25 Megatons or 25,000,000 tons of TNT. As you can see, a B41 is 3 measures of magnitude more powerful then the Fat Man. (25,000,000 compared to 16,000.)

Also, no ships could be directly hit in the test BECAUSE THE DEVICE WAS DETONATED UNDERWATER. I may not have a Ph.D, but at least I not only passed 3rd grade math, but also high school history.

Well Troll maybe I could borrow your Space shuttle.

http://thayer.dartmo...ssingham_99.pdf

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

A fair point, we haven't made it a habit to create large, armor piercing nuclear weapons, mostly because any target you can think of can simply be flattened, melted or irradiated instead.

You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.

The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

You know, I couldn't stop laughing after you left out Gamma radiation. So I think it's the other way around, arguing with you is a pathetic excuse, right now, just trying to explain things to you is a waste of time for all involved.

Also, try to keep people seperated in your pea sized brain, I wasen't the one talking about WW2 battleships in detail. Also, for reference, neither nuclear weapon was detonated in direct contact with a battleship. Above water was 520 feet above surface, below water was 90 feet depth.

Modifié par TornadoADV, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:01 .

[Darth_Ultima]

Giantevilhead wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...
You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.

The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

Really!?!!!!!  THE SUN IS A GIANT FUSION REACTOR!?!  I DID not know THAT!?!  BTW That was a sarcastic remark.  I am done arguing.  If anybody wants to continue dissecting the plausability of defending Earth from alien invasion using nuclear weapons then go right ahead.  I will be playing Mass Effect.

[Darth_Ultima]

TornadoADV wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

TornadoADV wrote...

You sir, know nothing about nuclear weapons. If you want to get down to brass tacks, nuclear weapons cause the most damage after the fact of their explosion, their effects on the terrain and biological prevent all but the most prepared emergency response from being able to do anything but contain the spreading fires.

But perhaps you didn't hear me the first time, a 25 megaton bomb has a explosion foot print larger then manhatten island that New York City sits on. Given the measurements of a Reaper, that is more then well capable enough of completely enveloping said Reaper and atomizing it.

Last time I checked, an explosion is thermal, kinetic and sometimes radiological.

Do you have a PhD in Nuclear studies?  I highly doubt it.  If you did then maybe I would except that you know more then me.  And yes I know that an explosion has thermal and in the case of nukes radiological effects as well.  The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.  Your argument is stupid.  If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Do you even know what a Kilo is? It stands for 1,000, a Kiloton is 1,000 Tons. So a 23 Kiloton warhead has the explosive effect of 23,000 tons of TNT. The B41, the largest nuclear weapon produced by the US, is 25 Megatons or 25,000,000 tons of TNT. As you can see, a B41 is 3 measures of magnitude more powerful then the Fat Man. (25,000,000 compared to 16,000.)

Also, no ships could be directly hit in the test BECAUSE THE DEVICE WAS DETONATED UNDERWATER. I may not have a Ph.D, but at least I not only passed 3rd grade math, but also high school history.

Well Troll maybe I could borrow your Space shuttle.

http://thayer.dartmo...ssingham_99.pdf

I'm glad we're comparing battleships in the 40's to starships over 200 years from then. Not to mention the amount of time nuclear technology can develop more.

A fair point, we haven't made it a habit to create large, armor piercing nuclear weapons, mostly because any target you can think of can simply be flattened, melted or irradiated instead.

You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.

The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

You know, I couldn't stop laughing after you left out Gamma radiation. So I think it's the other way around, arguing with you is a pathetic excuse, right now, just trying to explain things to you is a waste of time for all involved.

Also, try to keep people seperated in your pea sized brain, I wasen't the one talking about WW2 battleships in detail. Also, for reference, neither nuclear weapon was detonated in direct contact with a battleship. Above water was 520 feet above surface, below water was 90 feet depth.

Gamma radiation is a high frequency form of electromagnetic radiation and is different from particulate forms of radioactive decay like Alpha and Beta decay.  I guess only those with pea-sized brains like me know the difference.  Have fun dissecting that genius.

[Cody]

Giantevilhead wrote...
Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

This is true. That and the thing is though the armor that the space ships used in mass effect are more or less over 9000 times more protective than the ones used today for any ship.

Comparing armor, and weapons as of now or in the past to mass effect is a moot point. Hell any type of nuke that we use at present time may do absolutly nothing to any of the ships in mass effect. Mainly because their armor plating is too friggin advanced. Same goes for their shielding. So in the end any weapon that we use today would probably not work on anything on mass effect. Mainly because it is a FICTIONAL story that takes place in the future....

Also i have to say that the weapons used by the ships in mass effect are indeed a hell of a lot better seeing as they can fire such weapons every 2 seconds. Which in the end it makes the speed comparable if not greater than the power of a nuke used today.

[Giantevilhead]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

Really!?!!!!!  THE SUN IS A GIANT FUSION REACTOR!?!  I DID not know THAT!?!  BTW That was a sarcastic remark.  I am done arguing.  If anybody wants to continue dissecting the plausability of defending Earth from alien invasion using nuclear weapons then go right ahead.  I will be playing Mass Effect.

Right, sarcasm, from someone who didn't know that the prefix mega denotes a multiple of a million and the prefix of kilo denotes a multiple of a thousand.

I'm surprised that you even managed to install Mass Effect on your computer considering how the game requires several gigabytes of disk space and you no doubt thought that your 100 megabyte hard drive had more than enough capacity.

[Inverness Moon]

Anyhow, the way I see it. If point defense lasers didn't exist, we could just nuke the reapers and that would be the end of that.

Darth_Ultima wrote...

The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had the explosive potential of 10,000,000 tons of TNT.

Maybe you should learn what a kiloton is before you go around calling people stupid.

Darth_Ultima wrote...
If a real world WWII battleship can survive a direct nuclear impact then so could a fictional futuristic 2 kilometer long sentient starship.  Look up videos of the Operation Crossroads test at Bikini Atoll on youtube and see for yourself.  Moron.

Maybe if you actually looked at the videos you were talking about you noticed none of those ships were directly hit by the bombs. One was detonated in the air and the other was detonated under water. If either of those bombs had been on the deck of any of those ships, that ship would have been vaporized.

Anyhow, as for the rest of your posts. Half of them are nonsensical trolling and your attitude is terrible. I don't know if you're always like this or if you just had a bad day, but if you can't stop being a jerk just leave.

[Cody]

this thread is so being locked soon....

[Cody]

Inverness Moon wrote...

Anyhow, the way I see it. If point defense lasers didn't exist, we could just nuke the reapers and that would be the end of that.

not rly. Read my post above.

[Inverness Moon]

CodyMelch wrote...

This is true. That and the thing is though the armor that the space ships used in mass effect are more or less over 9000 times more protective than the ones used today for any ship.

Source?

CodyMelch wrote...
Comparing armor, and weapons as of now or in the past to mass effect is a moot point. Hell any type of nuke that we use at present time may do absolutly nothing to any of the ships in mass effect. Mainly because their armor plating is too friggin advanced. Same goes for their shielding. So in the end any weapon that we use today would probably not work on anything on mass effect. Mainly because it is a FICTIONAL story that takes place in the future....

Also i have to say that the weapons used by the ships in mass effect are indeed a hell of a lot better seeing as they can fire such weapons every 2 seconds. Which in the end it makes the speed comparable if not greater than the power of a nuke used today.

You don't have an accurate view of the Mass Effect universe. You're greatly overestimating the strength of their armored plating. Their shielding also does not block pure energy.

Also, being able to fire a 20 kiloton nuke every 2 seconds is nothing compared to a single multi-megaton nuke which is 1000 times more powerful.

[OnionMan26]

Darth_Ultima wrote...
You are a moron which is why you have to use jabbs like asking if I know what a kilo is.  They tested two bombs called Able and Baker.  One was below water and the other was above water.  Get your facts straight before you try to argue history.  Arguing with you is starting to be a pathetic execise.  And did you seriously just post a paper on sheilding spacecrafts from the electro-magnetic radiation of a solar flare?  Yes ****** electro-magnetic radiation can interfer with electronics but electomagnetic radiation is completely different from the Alpha and Beta radiation that a nuclear reaction also causes.  Living things are vulnerable to these kinds of radiation because they interfer with the chemical bonds in the molecules of cells causing all kinds of adverse effects.
The more I write the more I realize I am feeding your ego by indulging you.  You obviously love your technobabble but I doubt you know what it means.  So I will simply state that if a WWII battleship can survive a nuclear impact without being atomized then so could a space ship from the future.  Do you even know what atomized means?  It means being reduced to paticles.  Those ships that did sink from the nuclear detonation are still sitting at the bottom of the Bikini Atoll and were not reduced to particles or vaporized.

Rather than being abusive, please answer my points in my post above. The sunken ships where not directly hit. 

Let me make it as simple as possible. If you take a block of ice, and apply an Acetylene torch to it, what happens to the ice? Does it stay ice, melt to water or will it evaporate. You are basically saying in your argument it will stay a block of ice with some damage. 

The torch burns at 32,000 times the melting point of ice. The temperatures to create fusion are ~50,000,000 degrees c, 38,000 times the melting point of steel, 16,600 times the boiling point of steel. This is the temperature the ship would be subjected to as the warhead exploded right next to it. By you saying it would not vaporise is basically saying its wreckage would float around intact, in the centre of the sun . SO rather than insult those who back arguments with reason and fact, why not introduce some valid rebuttal?

TornadoADV wrote...
1.) You switch out the Eezo warheads of the Javelins for Nuclear Warheads. So if you could slip a Javelin through what we can assume is a Reaper's GARDIAN like defenses (If they have them, all their weapons seem focused on their tentacles rather then their shell.) you can deliever a nuclear warhead.
2.) Javelin missiles are slow because of their radically increased mass from their mass effect fields that let them bull through opposing kinetic barriers. A Nuclear missile could go as fast as you want it to go, hell, you could turn a mass driver round into an encased nuclear warhead and just fire it at the Reaper.
3.) Radiation means a lot around stars, it's the primary reason for incredibly short battles close to them (thermal radiation and gamma radiation). A nuclear bomb is almost pure hard gamma rays, a literal quasar or pulsar. If the EMP doesn't weaken the target's electronics due to logical hardening, the wave of punishing hard gamma will do the trick.

1) The codex states that fleet battle take place at vast distances and ships have point defence lasers, lasers = speed of light = dead missile . They have no need for using nuclear weapons in fleet engagements as they are inefficient compared to other means (to prove a point, look at rations of artillery shells fired in any way compared to missiles). The ships also move incredibly quickly so dodging a missile that would of been fired from very far away is pretty easy. Even in a modern, current day battle, Russian doctrine for attacking a us carrier group is to launch several squadrons in the air to saturate the target with missiles in the hope some get through because most of them will be taken out wither before launch or in flight by CIWS. Hell AEGIS cruisers can take out satellites now never mind a ballistic missile ( which is several magnitudes faster than a conventional guided missile). And you got to remember, due to the necessities of the speeds these ships travels their sensors will have to be pretty damn good so won’t have any issues in tracking a conventional missile.

2) Yes but the fleet has no need for complex weapons when solid slugs work just as well. They not going to have massive stock piles of nuclear weapons that do not work better than current weapons do in current battles in case they get attacked by an enemy that plays differently. We don't keep stocks of war hammers in case we get attacked by aliens from outer space with shields that make projectile weapons useless? 

3) We do not know that, space is full of radiation and solar flares emit enough of it to kill astronauts instantly if they were caught in one outside our magnetosphere. It is likely nebulas can be filled with all sorts of radiation we don’t even know of yet. We are guessing here but needless to say, considering how full of radiation space is that in 200 years’ time, ships will be pretty well shielded against it

It’s a frivolous argument, but fun none the less

Modifié par OnionMan26, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:23 .

[OnionMan26]

Giantevilhead wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

Really!?!!!!!  THE SUN IS A GIANT FUSION REACTOR!?!  I DID not know THAT!?!  BTW That was a sarcastic remark.  I am done arguing.  If anybody wants to continue dissecting the plausability of defending Earth from alien invasion using nuclear weapons then go right ahead.  I will be playing Mass Effect.

Right, sarcasm, from someone who didn't know that the prefix mega denotes a multiple of a million and the prefix of kilo denotes a multiple of a thousand.

I'm surprised that you even managed to install Mass Effect on your computer considering how the game requires several gigabytes of disk space and you no doubt thought that your 100 megabyte hard drive had more than enough capacity.

Yup, it is amazing how he thinks steel would survive it. Nuclear Fusion is what keeps the sun burning Darth_Ultima, it's also the exact same thing that makes a FUSION bomb go boom

Modifié par OnionMan26, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:24 .

[Giantevilhead]

CodyMelch wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

This is true. That and the thing is though the armor that the space ships used in mass effect are more or less over 9000 times more protective than the ones used today for any ship.

Comparing armor, and weapons as of now or in the past to mass effect is a moot point. Hell any type of nuke that we use at present time may do absolutly nothing to any of the ships in mass effect. Mainly because their armor plating is too friggin advanced. Same goes for their shielding. So in the end any weapon that we use today would probably not work on anything on mass effect. Mainly because it is a FICTIONAL story that takes place in the future....

Also i have to say that the weapons used by the ships in mass effect are indeed a hell of a lot better seeing as they can fire such weapons every 2 seconds. Which in the end it makes the speed comparable if not greater than the power of a nuke used today.

But the projectiles fired by their ships only have the kinetic energy equivalent to 38 kilotons of TNT. The most powerful nuclear weapon built had a yield of 50 megatons, 1,315 times more powerful than the weapon they used by dreadnaughts. Granted, only a small amount of the radiation would hit the target if the bomb was detonated in space and the effect would be more disperse but even with our current technology, we can design a nuke to release its energy asymetrically, basically making it release more radiation towards the direction we want it to. With the kind of technology they have in ME, they should be able to design nukes with directionally shaped detonations.

[Darth_Ultima]

Giantevilhead wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

Really!?!!!!!  THE SUN IS A GIANT FUSION REACTOR!?!  I DID not know THAT!?!  BTW That was a sarcastic remark.  I am done arguing.  If anybody wants to continue dissecting the plausability of defending Earth from alien invasion using nuclear weapons then go right ahead.  I will be playing Mass Effect.

Right, sarcasm, from someone who didn't know that the prefix mega denotes a multiple of a million and the prefix of kilo denotes a multiple of a thousand.

I'm surprised that you even managed to install Mass Effect on your computer considering how the game requires several gigabytes of disk space and you no doubt thought that your 100 megabyte hard drive had more than enough capacity.

Actually I do.  I also know what tera, peta, exa, zetta, and yotta mean too.  However you seem to have difficulty reading because I never said that I did not understand what those mean.  You really have to try harder than that to insult my intelligence.  Unless your IQ is somewhere above 150 then don't bother trying.

Modifié par Darth_Ultima, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:25 .

[TornadoADV]

CodyMelch wrote...

Inverness Moon wrote...

Anyhow, the way I see it. If point defense lasers didn't exist, we could just nuke the reapers and that would be the end of that.

not rly. Read my post above.

Super compressed diamond boron armor plating still can't resist the effects of a star. Hell, a less then 1 second exposure from a fighter sized drone laser was enough to burn it away and expose the mounting frame underneath it. A nuke is many times the intensity and all over the surface of the ship all at once.

Actually I do.  I also know what tera, peta, exa, zetta, and yotta mean too.  However you seem to have difficulty reading.  You really have to try harder than that to insult my intelligence.  Unless your IQ is somewhere above 150 then don't bother trying.

Look, the funny man thinks because he can type it, he understands what it is. So what is it? Stupidity, Can't Proof Read or fingers the size of bratwursts?

Modifié par TornadoADV, 13 décembre 2010 - 02:26 .

[OnionMan26]

Giantevilhead wrote...

CodyMelch wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

This is true. That and the thing is though the armor that the space ships used in mass effect are more or less over 9000 times more protective than the ones used today for any ship.

Comparing armor, and weapons as of now or in the past to mass effect is a moot point. Hell any type of nuke that we use at present time may do absolutly nothing to any of the ships in mass effect. Mainly because their armor plating is too friggin advanced. Same goes for their shielding. So in the end any weapon that we use today would probably not work on anything on mass effect. Mainly because it is a FICTIONAL story that takes place in the future....

Also i have to say that the weapons used by the ships in mass effect are indeed a hell of a lot better seeing as they can fire such weapons every 2 seconds. Which in the end it makes the speed comparable if not greater than the power of a nuke used today.

But the projectiles fired by their ships only have the kinetic energy equivalent to 38 kilotons of TNT. The most powerful nuclear weapon built had a yield of 50 megatons, 1,315 times more powerful than the weapon they used by dreadnaughts. Granted, only a small amount of the radiation would hit the target if the bomb was detonated in space and the effect would be more disperse but even with our current technology, we can design a nuke to release its energy asymetrically, basically making it release more radiation towards the direction we want it to. With the kind of technology they have in ME, they should be able to design nukes with directionally shaped detonations.

But why would they need to when the current slugs work just as well? A slug firing a nuclear warhead is magnitudes more complex than firing a solid one and for what benefit? They can only fight with the weapons they have to hand.

[Inverness Moon]

OnionMan26 wrote...

Yup, it is amazing how he thinks steel would survive it. Nuclear Fusion is what keeps the sun burning Darth_Ultima, it's also the exact same think that makes a FUSION bomb go boom

I think he missed the part where the Castle Bravo test vaporized the island it was on in a 7km wide fireball. The reapers are about 2km long for comparison.

I have to say though, he is the first person I've ever seen say they think anything on this planet could survive a direct hit from a nuke.

[OnionMan26]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Giantevilhead wrote...
You do know that the sun is basically a giant fusion reactor don't you? A nuclear weapon can release the same kinds of radiation that the sun releases. In fact, the design of a nuke can be altered to release any kind of high energy radiation you want.

Also, we can build nuclear weapons that are more than a thousand times more powerful than the bombs used in Operation Crossroads. So comparing our bombs to the bombs used back then is like comparing the mass drivers in ME to the ballistic weapons we have today.

Really!?!!!!!  THE SUN IS A GIANT FUSION REACTOR!?!  I DID not know THAT!?!  BTW That was a sarcastic remark.  I am done arguing.  If anybody wants to continue dissecting the plausability of defending Earth from alien invasion using nuclear weapons then go right ahead.  I will be playing Mass Effect.

Right, sarcasm, from someone who didn't know that the prefix mega denotes a multiple of a million and the prefix of kilo denotes a multiple of a thousand.

I'm surprised that you even managed to install Mass Effect on your computer considering how the game requires several gigabytes of disk space and you no doubt thought that your 100 megabyte hard drive had more than enough capacity.

Actually I do.  I also know what tera, peta, exa, zetta, and yotta mean too.  However you seem to have difficulty reading because I never said that I did not understand what those mean.  You really have to try harder than that to insult my intelligence.  Unless your IQ is somewhere above 150 then don't bother trying.

Anyone that comes back with what you have above, when faced with an overwhelming array of fact and reason proves they are a 14 year old losing an an argument :/