This might take a little bit to piece together so bear with me.

If you watch the video below (and I know most of you will not) at around the 3:50 mark, he starts talking about China and how they’re building weapons for the future, and they’re not 10 years behind the last war like we are. He makes the point that if there ever was a conflict, China’s hypersonic missiles could take out our aircraft carriers within minutes.

Which brings me to something I heard a couple of months ago and it has stuck with me. There is a huge plot line flaw with Star Wars, Star Trek or most any sci-fi movie: if they have ships that can move at the speed of light, why is it that they’re firing lasers at each other with rifles?

Iif you have the technology to achieve  lightspeed in a ship as large as the death star, why not just fly it directly into a planet and completely destroy it? Why  the need to build and shoot some kind of giant laser?

If you can make a craft, the size of a small moon, aim it at the enemy planet and hit it traveling at light speed and it will effectively destroy the planet. Look what happened when a tiny (relatively speaking) asteroid hit the Earth. Imagine something a quarter of the size of the moon, traveling at the speed of light hitting the Earth. What percentage of the population would be killed immediately 50%? 75%? How long would it take all lifeforms to die? Weeks? A couple months?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4WRj8JFNkiM&pp=ygUicGV0ZSBoZWdzZXRoIGhvdyBjaGluYSB
pcyBidWlsZGluZw%3D%3D

Iif you have the technology to achieve  lightspeed in a ship as large as the death star, why not just fly it directly into a planet and completely destroy it? Why  the need to build and shoot some kind of giant laser?


 Opinions follow:

 While it only took 4 years to build the second Death Star, it takes 24 hours to charge the reactors to full - which is the amount required to blow up an entire planet.

 Using the Death Star as an example they could either destroy one planet every 4 years if they use the structure itself, or destroy 1,460 planets per year using the turbo-lasers.

 If it were 1/4 of the size it would be fair to say they could use a smaller Death Star every year to damage a planet.  If it took less time to manufacture a lightspeed ship than it did to fire the weapons I could see the logic.

 This post is an opinion.  The previous sentence indicates an opinion.

Eegore wrote on Yesterday at 07:52:03:


Yeah, but it took four years to build it because of all the complexity. All they have to do is build a big ball, put a light speed engine inside it and send it off. Seems like they could do that very quickly.

If hypersonic missiles really could take out aircraft carriers quickly, doesn’t that make aircraft carriers somewhat obsolete?

Since E=MC Squared, as,a,mass approaches the speed of light, it gains in potential kinetic energy at a nonlinear rate.
An object striking Earth at near light speed would likely go through.
Think Slo-Mo picture of a bullet going through an egg.

I'm surprised TC didn't get that in already.

Hypersonic missiles must be very expensive. But,if there is a target that ya Really want to smoke, with a near 100% likelihood of it succeeding, drop the money, smoke the target.
Otherwise, drones are relatively inexpensive and nobody is exposed to the countermeasures the drone may see. Send several, pound your way through.


These are Out There, sold to several countries. Fast and deadly.

https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/todays-missi
le-threat/russia/p-270-moskit-ss-n-22-sunburn/

https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/missile-threat-and-proliferation/todays-mi...