Missing For The Klingons

posted on December 18th, 2005, 2:07 pm

you want to measure voume. that the ammount of SPACE something takes up

[[TD]Roach]

posted on December 19th, 2005, 8:50 am

Last edited by [TD]Roach on December 19th, 2005, 11:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

you are mixing up mass with weight. if you are looking up at daystrom, everything is measured in tonnes. for instance the vorcha is 2.2 million metric tonnes. and a ton is a unit to measure the weight of something and you need gravity for that because weight changes with different gravity. you still have mass. but the weight of the item changes. that is why a bar of gold is just as light as a feather in space. ofcourse it has more mass then a feather but it you can't measure it's weight


same with with your formula:

weight = mass x gravity. well hello in space there is no gravity or very very small amount of gravity

on earth:

weight = mass x gravity

= 60 x 1 = 60 kg for a person

that is why on the moon you have

weight = mass x 1/6 gravity

so the if a person stands on the moon and on earth the person is 60 kg, on the moon he is 10 kg. but his mass is the same. he doesn't shrink to a small midget or something to become 10 kg

and in space

weight = mass x infinite small number ( 0) gravity

and 0 timess mass = 0 . ofcourse it has a mass, but you can't measure it's weight in space because you don't have gravity. that is why people float in space. he has mass but with out gravity he has no weight so he is as light as a feather though still containing all the mass he had on earth.


you just showed it in your own formula. sorry for the late reply but i just didn't noticed the thread

posted on December 19th, 2005, 2:48 pm

Mass=density
Volume=size
weight=gravity

posted on December 19th, 2005, 2:56 pm

Mass=density
Volume=size
weight=gravity

in that case the word mass doesn't make sense. you cant say a ship has a density of 2.2 mill tonnes. density would be say 50 tonnes per square meter (or something like that).

posted on December 19th, 2005, 2:58 pm

I dontremember its been to years since i had to know nthis imin chem1

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:04 pm

ok then how about this

they measured it on qo'nos before sending it into the oribital shipyards

the parts that is then thye put it together like you do

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:06 pm

that would make since but the feds coudnt know then because dont theybuild ships in orbit?

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:10 pm

yeah but the parts gotta come from somewhere and they would obviously have the part size weight references

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:18 pm

oh ok, that makes since

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:21 pm

why was i only the only person to come with that its like you all have no common sense ****

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:22 pm

noi just tried to do it from memory because im to lazy to get up and find my old textbook

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:26 pm

you coulda just used a little sense

posted on December 19th, 2005, 3:39 pm

thats what a text books forlol

posted on December 19th, 2005, 4:20 pm

ok then how about this

they measured it on qo'nos before sending it into the oribital shipyards

the parts that is then thye put it together like you do

aaarrrggghhh my whole point in all this is that you cant weigh a CGI. All these figures are made up since they (baring the akira's) are in white writing which means they are speculation. the akira & vorcha & nebula look about the same size on screen, they are classed as the same class therefore they are comparable as equals. the mass of something has no meaning for a starship as extra mass should be of no disadvantage/advantage since the laws of aerodynamics are somewhat different up there among the stars. So saying either one is just plain stronger than the other is stupid since they each have their strengths & weaknesses.

posted on December 19th, 2005, 4:27 pm

like the defiant will get killed by phasers from an arika but will defeat a rhinen torpedo refit