Lubak10 0 Posted March 25, 2003 Which do you think has more science in it? :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
removed 0 Posted March 26, 2003 definitely star trek. star wars is alot more rustic and gritty i seem to think. (ep I & II suck though) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Xeroc 0 Posted March 26, 2003 Star Trek by far. Many things in Star Trek are based on real scientific principles and are explained in the shows. Star Wars is just more "cool-looking" tha real science. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
master_q 0 Posted March 26, 2003 Well I hate to get into the “SW vs. ST” because they really are different and are different topics. One is a long time ago in a galaxy far far away and another is in the future - are future. But besides that and I sure we are all aware of the fact that the two shows are very different. On the science / technology section ST does present more science and has a much deeper root into. It explains its science / technology and part of that is because this show has much more air time and there are tons of hours for ST then that of SW because it is just movies. But in an overall senses and a unbiased one I would say ST. Master Q StarTrek_Master_Q@yahoo.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Takara_Soong 4 Posted March 26, 2003 Definitely Star Trek. They have always had science advisors for the franchise and are a lot more careful to get things right scientifically speaking than any other science fiction program. Here is a quote from startrek.com: Trek Inspires "Breakthrough" Research A program at NASA specifically charged with the task of turning science fiction concepts such as those in Star Trek into reality was the topic of a full page article in the Los Angeles Times Wednesday titled "Science by Scotty." I think Star Trek has been inspiration for so many things in our lives now. Don't you think palm pilots look an awful lot like the pads they have used since the beginning of TNG. I'd be curious if they took a poll of people working at NASA and in other related fields and individuals studying in those fields how many were inspired by Star Trek to go into science the numbers would be surprising to the general public (but not us). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tank 0 Posted March 26, 2003 I've always thought of Star Trek as being "science fiction" and Star Wars as being "space fantasy." Both are great but for very different reasons. Star Trek definatly has more science in it I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdigs 0 Posted March 26, 2003 ST vs SW..growing up when I was glued to the boob tube watching TNG all my buds were playing with Life savers..I never got it. I liked the idea behind Lucas stories..Tank said it best "I've always thought of Star Trek as being "science fiction" and Star Wars as being "space fantasy"....when it comes to Science..hearing the engineers babble..ST definitly takes the cake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lubak10 0 Posted March 27, 2003 What about Star Trek vs Babylon 5? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ensign_beedrill 0 Posted March 28, 2003 Star Trek has more science than Star Wars, no doubt. They've always had science advisors on the crew, and they really try to come up with sciency explanations for the things that happen. Star Trek is not always an adventure story. It doesn't always rely on the action to get it's point across or to get the viewer's attention. I think that's why it has more science. Star Wars is more of an action series. They focus on the explosions and space battles and fun and romance and things like that. While Star Trek does that too, and more often nowadays, it also focuses on the science and realism aspects. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yillara Skye 1 Posted March 28, 2003 I know this is slightly off topic. but I gotta ask OK, ensign beedrill, what was the inspiration for your screen name? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ensign_beedrill 0 Posted March 29, 2003 Uhm... *blushes* OK, but you have to promise not to laugh... Beedrill is a Pokémon. Yeah, I'm a Pokémon fan. But just of the old stuff. I don't like the new things they're coming out with. Blah. And, Beedrill is this really spiffin' bee Pokémon with drill/needle things and it looks cool. And it's a pretty good fighter, too. And, well, bees have always been my favorite animal, so it's reasonable that Beedrill would be my favorite Pokémon, right? So Beedrill's been my general screen name for years, now. And the ensign part... well... I think it would be pretty cool to be an ensign in Starfleet. Thus, Ensign_Beedrill. I'm new to this thing... is there a way you can reply to specific replies, or do you just have to reply to the starting post? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tank 0 Posted March 29, 2003 Uhm... *blushes* OK, but you have to promise not to laugh... Beedrill is a Pokémon. Yeah, I'm a Pokémon fan. But just of the old stuff. I don't like the new things they're coming out with. Blah. And, Beedrill is this really spiffin' bee Pokémon with drill/needle things and it looks cool. And it's a pretty good fighter, too. And, well, bees have always been my favorite animal, so it's reasonable that Beedrill would be my favorite Pokémon, right? So Beedrill's been my general screen name for years, now. And the ensign part... well... I think it would be pretty cool to be an ensign in Starfleet. Thus, Ensign_Beedrill. I'm new to this thing... is there a way you can reply to specific replies, or do you just have to reply to the starting post? Click the "Quote" button at the top right corner of any post and it will appear as a quote like this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Takara_Soong 4 Posted March 29, 2003 What is it with George Lucas that he can take good actors (Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor) and get such bad performances from them. Now that's a talent. I used to really enjoy episodes IV - VI. I saw Phantom Menace but it was a let down and I still have seen Attack of the Clones. I much prefer the realism of Star Trek compared to the toy marketing cuteness of Star Wars. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lubak10 0 Posted March 29, 2003 I think B5 beats both Star Trek and Star Wars though for one reason. Artifical gravity. In B5 the station is spining so that explains how their artifical gravity works but I have yet to come up with an expilnation for ST or SW. There probably isn't one but if anyone could come up with a reason it would save me a lot of frusration. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A l t e r E g o 9 Posted March 29, 2003 There probably isn't one but if anyone could come up with a reason it would save me a lot of frusration. Quite a bit of thought has gone into the theroy of how ships generate gravity. I was just reading from the ST TNG Technical Manual page 144, and it is quite technical but I will try to say it in a way you might understand (layman’s terms). Take a compass and place it near any operating motor such as a fan for creating a breeze to cool off with, notice how the needle of the compass changes its direction as you bring the compass near. You are witnessing a Magnetic Field in action. On board ships, lets say the 1701 D, there are six hundred Gravity Generators placed all around which simply put are kind of like the same motor in your fan, a "thing" spins inside the Generator creating a Magnetic Field and the same way your motor caused the compass needle to "move to align itself with the field", a Gravity Generator causes your body to "align with the field of the generator" keeping you erect (not floating around) and your feet planted on the floor because of a magnetic attraction between yourself and the Generator. See? This is one of the MANY marvels of Trek. Every bit of the technology in Trek are examples of every day things in our reality, evolving to become the marvels of the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lubak10 0 Posted March 29, 2003 I so need to get the tecnical manual! Thanks! :lol: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A l t e r E g o 9 Posted March 29, 2003 Your Welcome! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yillara Skye 1 Posted April 1, 2003 Uhm... *blushes* OK, but you have to promise not to laugh... Beedrill is a Pokémon. Yeah, I'm a Pokémon fan. But just of the old stuff. I don't like the new things they're coming out with. Blah. And, Beedrill is this really spiffin' bee Pokémon with drill/needle things and it looks cool. And it's a pretty good fighter, too. And, well, bees have always been my favorite animal, so it's reasonable that Beedrill would be my favorite Pokémon, right? So Beedrill's been my general screen name for years, now. And the ensign part... well... I think it would be pretty cool to be an ensign in Starfleet. Thus, Ensign_Beedrill. I'm new to this thing... is there a way you can reply to specific replies, or do you just have to reply to the starting post? Don't worry, I cannot laugh, since I am a bit of a fan of Pokemon myself. I'm just a Star Trek: TNG fan first and foremost! So, I had to ask since I recognized that name! The new stuff you mention, isn't really all that bad. But, I mainly played the game. As for Star Trek vs. Star Wars.....Star Trek was always been the science part of fiction and Star Wars is the fantasy part of the genre.. Star Trek has science that is currently being worked on today. And Star Wars, now you don't see soldiers fighting with light sabres today, do you?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VaBeachGuy 12 Posted April 1, 2003 They're both Sc-Fi but I think Star Wars is much more Science Fiction and Star Trek has a lot more Science Fact in it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yillara Skye 1 Posted April 1, 2003 That is why I said that Star Wars was more fantasy(not a lot based in reality), Trek has grounds in reality, and is slowly becoming more and more tangible. Warp drive is becoming less of a obstacle to figure out and then overcome(discover and use). Who knows we may have warp drive by the time of "First Contact" then again we may not achieve it until the end of the century or the beginning of the next. Only time will tell... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
~Crims~ 0 Posted April 6, 2003 Star Trek by far. Many things in Star Trek are based on real scientific principles and are explained in the shows. Star Wars is just more "cool-looking" tha real science. I concur. Star Trek explain the theories, for the most part, and Star Wars technology was just kind of there with no explanation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lubak10 0 Posted April 13, 2003 The biggest thing wrong with Star Wars was the Death Star blowing up planets. If they really did blow up a planet the shock wave would tear them apart. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ddillard 2 Posted April 17, 2003 I definitely agree that Star Trek has more tech than Star Wars. One of the reasons that I have always preferred Star Trek to Star Wars (don't get me wrong I love them both) is that Star Trek explained why things worked and did not rely on you believing that they worked, because they told you they did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaQuIs_PrInCeSs 0 Posted April 17, 2003 I agree, I think that Star Trek is alot more realistic and it's a lot more likely to happen in the future. Star Wars is in like a different galaxy too I think. Star Wars is still cool though, It's just a little hard to believe. :blink: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cptwright 1 Posted April 17, 2003 Star Trek by far. Many things in Star Trek are based on real scientific principles and are explained in the shows. Star Wars is just more "cool-looking" tha real science. I concur. Star Trek explain the theories, for the most part, and Star Wars technology was just kind of there with no explanation. now i think most of you are missing a valuable difference here. STAR TREK is based on earth science in the future. based upon science fact now. STAR WARS is based on an entirely different civilization never seen by earth humans. thus a big difference, also lucas had a couple of hours in each movie to get his point across. star trek has had numerous episodes, movies, series, TECHNICAL manuals and many books to get the science fact base across. so lets give lucas a break on that subject. as far as episode I and II they were excellent installments in the starwars saga. cant wait for episode III you have to look at them as informative movies on how the things that happened in IV thru VI came about. its great. LONG LIVE STAR TREK AND STAR WARS. B5 is also a great show. STARGATE SG-1 is really great though. i like the concept of all the egyptian technology that we cant figure out today was really alien. i think they have visited us through out the years, and still are. aafter all to assume we are the only intelligent beings in the known universes is absurd, and very egotistical on our parts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A l t e r E g o 9 Posted April 17, 2003 as far as episode I and II they were excellent installments in the starwars saga. cant wait for episode III you have to look at them as informative movies on how the things that happened in IV thru VI came about. That is exacatly how I feel about ENT. What dosen't make sense about it is the largest part of it's charm. I thank goodness it's different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syperphobia 0 Posted May 3, 2003 STAR TREK has soo much more explination in it with their technology. While I am watching Star Wars, I am very clueless and dumbfounded by their idociticy and glamor forces. Their aliens look too ridiculus adding on futher to their fantasy and it just war based... one hero attempting to save his universe. This is way to far fetched, as we all know not one person can save the relms of space and time. Star Trek explains in depth and most people might think that with Voyager it was beginning to be fantasitic, but think about it: Voyager has the knowledge of the most gross alien facts in an unknown region of space.... it does have the plot of the one ship saving itself from hostile aliens, but everything was explained with their technology. Me being a science adventurer, not "geek" (sorry if this is an insult), uses Star Trek to outline scientific events in the world today, and so far the great Gene Roddenberry has ideas that our scentists use. If people long ago thought that Gene Roddenberry was a fantasy writer they would be really suprised to see our advanced world now and in the future events to come... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sam The Smuggler 1 Posted May 12, 2003 Life savers That's Lightsabers and yes, Trek has more Science..much more <----Has been watching Star Trek and Star Wars For as long as he can remember...even Loves the new ones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deagletime 1 Posted May 12, 2003 i agree with master q...comparing star wars and star trek are like sayin which is better apples or oranges..your gonna get a 50/50 answer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cptwright 1 Posted May 12, 2003 i agree with master q...comparing star wars and star trek are like sayin which is better apples or oranges..your gonna get a 50/50 answer precisely, as i said earlier in this topic, their both different types of movies, and shows. startrek has 10 movies, and 5 different series, to show all the science and technology, and a story for everything. star wars has now 5 movies, when finished 6, no series, only enough time for a story, and excellent one at that, but a story, no science, or tech talk can be thrown in in that short a time. enjoy both for what they are, and dont try to compare them. thats like a customer coming in to work, and asking about our best garage door, then complaining about the price, because hes comparing it to the competitiors lowest grade cheapo door. you just cant do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites