▲ 332 ▼ Battle of the Bands (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by negativenull@lemmy.world [M] to c/tenforward@lemmy.world 130 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago (2 children) 47 years later and I'm still not quite sure what "She can make point 5, past light speed." means. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) It's dumb but it's been retroactively taken to mean that it has a Class 0.5 hyperdrive, whereas a Star Destroyer has a Class 2. (Smaller class numbers are faster.) Light speed in Star Wars can be much faster than the speed of light. But then, pretty much everything to do with specifications and numbers of Star Wars tech is a clusterfuck of technobabble that makes Voyager's look coherent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't think you are meant to over think it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] wjrii@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago "Hey kid, it ain't that kind of movie." permalink fedilink source parent [–] Holyginz@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But see, that's not something us techie nerds can do. We LIVE to overthink these things. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) I always thought of it as 1.5 light speed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which isn't a practical speed for interstellar travel. It's literally just over warp 1. More practical would be to assume that there's a k missing 1.5k (thousand) light speed is warp 9.975. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 2 years ago The cope for awhile was that it was 1.5x lightspeed while in hyperspace, which also distorted distances, so you got much, much faster travel speeds without messing with relativity. Then they decided it was a multiplier applied to how long it took to travel a certain route, so lower was better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) It's dumb but it's been retroactively taken to mean that it has a Class 0.5 hyperdrive, whereas a Star Destroyer has a Class 2. (Smaller class numbers are faster.) Light speed in Star Wars can be much faster than the speed of light. But then, pretty much everything to do with specifications and numbers of Star Wars tech is a clusterfuck of technobabble that makes Voyager's look coherent. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't think you are meant to over think it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] wjrii@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago "Hey kid, it ain't that kind of movie." permalink fedilink source parent [–] Holyginz@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But see, that's not something us techie nerds can do. We LIVE to overthink these things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't think you are meant to over think it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] wjrii@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago "Hey kid, it ain't that kind of movie." permalink fedilink source parent [–] Holyginz@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But see, that's not something us techie nerds can do. We LIVE to overthink these things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago "Hey kid, it ain't that kind of movie." permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Holyginz@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago But see, that's not something us techie nerds can do. We LIVE to overthink these things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) I always thought of it as 1.5 light speed permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which isn't a practical speed for interstellar travel. It's literally just over warp 1. More practical would be to assume that there's a k missing 1.5k (thousand) light speed is warp 9.975. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 2 years ago The cope for awhile was that it was 1.5x lightspeed while in hyperspace, which also distorted distances, so you got much, much faster travel speeds without messing with relativity. Then they decided it was a multiplier applied to how long it took to travel a certain route, so lower was better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Which isn't a practical speed for interstellar travel. It's literally just over warp 1. More practical would be to assume that there's a k missing 1.5k (thousand) light speed is warp 9.975. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 2 years ago The cope for awhile was that it was 1.5x lightspeed while in hyperspace, which also distorted distances, so you got much, much faster travel speeds without messing with relativity. Then they decided it was a multiplier applied to how long it took to travel a certain route, so lower was better. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 2 years ago The cope for awhile was that it was 1.5x lightspeed while in hyperspace, which also distorted distances, so you got much, much faster travel speeds without messing with relativity. Then they decided it was a multiplier applied to how long it took to travel a certain route, so lower was better. permalink fedilink source parent