Magic and Technology of MGLN

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Kikaifan

Starships vs personal transportation could just be a range or cargo issue. I have the same view as you, but I don't think the Wolkenritter ability makes it all that inevitable.

I think that as well. if you look at our own world, even through flying is faster and plentiful the majority of commodities in the world is still transported by ships. Ships are slower but they carry a much larger load.

Also, inter-dimensional traveling could also be restricted to power levels. If only a A class or higher level mage have the ability to fly i would think the power level requirement for personal inter-dimensional traveling would be higher.

And for the TSBA, the ships also provids additional firepower backup the troops.

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

It indeed has nothing to do with it, but for what its worth, it is here.

As I thought. Oh well, interesting information anyway, concidering that Subaru and Teana's Barrier Jackets are build for defence, despite their lack of coverage, which again supports Barrier Jacket defences are not limited to the amount covered.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

At the rate I'm translating, you'll learn Japanese and challenge my translations by the time I'm done

That would certainly be sweet.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

I swear there was this post where you said you were good at math.

There was? Well, I'm slightly above average with math, I generally ranked a 7,5 there (Dutch grading system uses a score system of 1-10) but when I was in science classes, where the stuff like speed of sound and forces of impact came in, my scores were generaly around 6-ish.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

True, but then, that part of the plan went out the window when they started using magic. Which is why I'm actually not as tight on bodily limits as say Tk3997.

Ah, so you do do say that the Laws of Physics don't always apply? Progress!

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

Well, maybe, but they don't know before the operation that should this rather predictable contingency happen (if they simply thought there was no chance one of the Forwards will be thrown off the train, that's a horrendous lack of contingency planning - not that this is unusual to us anymore), no Gadgets will be around to come close to them.

*shrug* we have already established long ago that 7Arcs is not hell-bent on militairy logic. The scene only has one logical explanation, really: They needed an excuse for Caro to summon Friedrich.

From a surface view, the scene is not that bad. It's only when you dig deeper that it looks silly, as with most scenes.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

I'm sure lots of us will have cheered had Erio fallen to his death anyway (not me, but I know there are some people who think the Lightning team are better off not existing.

Dunno, the cries of death only came after his hero scene of rescuing Fate. The way he carried Fate in his arms made people cry havoc 'let go of my Fate-chan' or 'Nanoha will kill you Erio' (really, some NanoFate fans, or heck, Fate fans, can be so silly)

During that scene he was still known as the 'miracle loli groper' after all. Oh, how the mighty have fallen...

[arkhangelsk]

Originally Posted by Keroko

Ah, so you do do say that the Laws of Physics don't always apply? Progress!

Your inability to understand the Laws of Physics or Suspension of Disbelief is not my business.

Originally Posted by StarDestroyer.Net on SoD

How do you know which laws of physics apply and which ones don't?
All laws of physics apply unless it is absolutely impossible to rationalize events with them. Remember that in real life, if we saw an antigravity vessel, we would try to generate scientific theories which explain this new phenomenon while simultaneously remaining consistent with thousands of years of scientific observations prior to its discovery. We would not say "hmmm, I guess none of the laws of physics apply any more" and start over from scratch. Instead, we would do something like the following:

1. Try again to rationalize it within existing scientific theories. This must not be understated; people are often far too eager to assume that something violates physical laws when it does not.
   
2. Attempt to modify an existing theory or select between two previously equal competing theories to account for the new observation, while still maintaining consistency with previous observations and general scientific laws such as the first law of thermodynamics.
   
3. Attempt to generate an entirely new theory to account for the new observation, while still maintaining consistency with previous observations and general scientific laws such as the first law of thermodynamics. Quantum mechanics is an excellent example of this methodology in action: they needed a theory which would explain the odd behaviour of particles at quantum scales while simultaneously maintaining consistency with classical physics at macroscopic scales, so they invented one. It worked, and it has since been applied in order to design many technological devices.

In sci-fi analyses, we must often resort to option #3. We are forced to theorize about new and heretofore undiscovered concepts which can coexist with existing theories while simultaneously explaining the new phenomena. Hence, we end up with rationalizations like the Star Trek "mass-lightening" trick and NDF theory.

Anyway, Signum managing to throw Fate at the canon speed is not a violation of Physics, just exceeding human norms. The two are on entirely different levels.

[Comartemis]

Anyway, Signum managing to throw Fate at the canon speed is not a violation of Physics, just exceeding human norms. The two are on entirely different levels.

Whatever, ark. It doesn't make any difference anyways: I'm certainly not about to go out and become a physics major just so I can make scientifically-accurate characters and concepts, and I sincerely doubt Kero's going to either. The laws of science only apply when it's convenient or otherwise cool so far as I care.

Revolver Cannon is a blast of kinetic energy that sends the target flying; that's all I need to know, and that's all I care to know. I'm not interested in the forces involved with generating that kind of energy, I don't care about the laws of inertia or what-have-you(something else barrier jackets protect against), and I certainly don't care that science says such and such is supposed to be impossible. If you want to gimp your characters by forcing magic to bend to the laws of science, be my guest. But count me out of it.

[Wild Goose]

Ark doesn't write. He's into Nanoha for SoD, which has never really made much sense to me, really. It's like trying to SoD Hindi and Tamil movies with the dance sequences - how the hell do you explain those anyway? And those dance sequences and movies are explicitly said to be taking place in the "real world".

Anyway, ark doesn't write, so he can SoD to his (un?)willing heart's (dis?)content. (/me is referring to a PM where ark said he was tired of SoD, to which me headdesked and suggested SG-1 as a more appropriate show to SoD).

[Keroko]

Weee, we're doing it again, trailing of from a simple statement in the OC-thread and ending up with a tech-debate seems to be routine for us.

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

I know they revise things for the DVDs but that's a completely different version than what is in the TV. Do you have screenshots?

I think that was just Kha's personal theory. The DVD is no different then the TV in this regard.

[arkhangelsk]

Originally Posted by Tk3997

The problem you'd face is I have canon on my side IMO there 'sno way to prove IMO that the ship moved and indeed the scene hardly implied it it did as we see the weapon fired, streak to the target, and strike all in one continous shot. The only thing that prevents it being a slam dunk is that there's a perspective change as it fires so we can't see the ship and the target in the same scene, but given that it was a BEAM and was maintained for a noticeable amount of time after initial impact it seems pretty clear to me the ship did not move a noticeable distance.

Actually, on a recheck, the visual counterevidence is weak to the point of nonexistence (weaker than my memory). First, Lindy made it clear (this is not made clear in the Triad fansub) that they had to get to a safe distance before the "reaction". Second, there were several screen cuts, not a continuous scene. There was one hard cut to a zoom out as the concave field started to discharge. Then there is at least another one as the beam approached the Defense Program. Then we see the hit. Then we shift down to the ground, with a few more screencuts, and finally we head back to space to see the actual detonation. Basically, the visual cannot be said to contradict the dialogue or the DVD booklet text at all.

I've also said before that I can accept allot, but at some point SoD gives out and I'll just no, fuck you writers no. Some ideas are simply too stupid to accept or defend and a weapon with a blast radius longer then it's range is one of those.

Some Cold War nuclear torpedoes might qualify.

No rational military force or person ANYWHERE would commission such a thing also if you want to argue against me you're just helping the "TSAB sucks lol!" guys.

1) It is the TSAB.
2) Nice try to manipulate him by appealing to his stated desires.

Writers are often stupid and when faced with that stupidity in it's rawest form and I'm given the slightest out I'm going to take it. We're at that point with this the idea and compounding this is that the range in question is comically small for a weapon on a spacecraft acutally being possibly shorter then some modern artillery pieces.

That's like saying mage attack rounds are slower than bullets, and thus they can't be that slow.

Frankly if it's range is that short it's useless as a weapon against anything vaugely mobile it'll NEVER hit anything in space and in the atmosphere cruisers seem too sluggish to chase down anything moving faster then a helicopter. (as you might well expect given there less then aerodynamic shape and size)

Why did you think it was a tactical weapon at all? From the moment I heard of its short range, its role as a last ditch "demolition gun" is clear. You will notice when they entered combat with Cradle, everyone used something other than Arc.

What makes you think that the short range is some kind of deliberate choice, rather than a sign of the limitations and tradeoffs of the technology. Do you think the Americans loved their Mk45 ASTORs with their reputation for their 2.0 kill probability? Since this is about their last ditch anti-LL weapon, and they figure the worst of those could take out entire "worlds", one would think it is reasonable they will go for maximal firepower even at the cost of risking one of their ships (albeit only slightly since Arc is delay-fused so they can transfer away).

It actually increases the weapon's credibility as a last resort.

Originally Posted by Keroko

As for the hypocrisy, that was refering to the 'scene change doesn't count' even though scene changes were the very base for your defense in the Barrier Jacket debacle. Reversely, it was also aplied to Ark who suddenly values text over visuals. The irony of it was just too much not to comment on.

Simple black and white thinking does not improve your SoD skills.

Remember the Maximum Data Retention principle? Given that the visuals do not explicitly contradict the dialogue and text (in fact, on review, the blockage doesn't even truly exist), Maximum Data Retention says that you retain the dialogue.

Originally Posted by Tk3997

This is the ship seconds before firing:

Spoiler for Bad choice of pic:

(yeah okay fine the target isn't on screen but the big glowly column is a good indication were it's going to be in a second or so.)

You got this shot yourself and you chose this picture? There are pics with the target onscreen just a second or so later!

Once it DOSE fire the beam strikes the target in less then two seconds… So basiclly you’ve got a window of maybe 2 seconds to escape or be obliterated. Yeah I don’t think that’s dangerous AT ALL. Another thing to note from the image is that the ship is in very close to the same plane as the target with the planet below them this is important because…

It strikes it in two seconds, but it detonates several seconds later, w/ plenty of timeshifting scenecuts.

-1 You couldn’t even SEE something ship sized (and the target is probably smaller still) effectively at even 100 kilometers with your naked eye so to even observe the results well you’d need magnification and thus view screen.

Very well. We'll do it your way. We'll invalidate the dialogue and the text, and use your frame as the Primary Reference. Therefore, the ship does not transfer or do anything to extend the distance after shooting. Thus, the blast radius of the Arc must be smaller than the shooting range.

In that case, given a reasonable assumption of size for Asura and its obviously huge subtended width on screen, the inevitable conclusion using this frame as primary reference is that the ship is very close.

For example, if we assume target width as 200m, the subtended width as 10px (no way in heck that was only ten pixels), and a FOV of 45 degrees (a "normal" perspective"), the range comes out to ~16km. Ergo, the blast radius must be lower than 16km.

Nice, Tk, you've just killed the range and the firepower of the Arc.

But fine then the TSAB best weapon has a range shorter then a modern rocket assisted artillery shell which means it would have to drop into planetary atmosphere to attack anything thus allowing it to be intercepted by all manner of weapons that normally would be useless against a space ship. The TSAB Navy is thus feeble beyond imagination and laughably useless in fact a planet on earths life quite possibly COULD apparently defeat them assuming they where willing to use stuff like nukes to attack the ships. Congrats you've made the TSAB suck even harder!

1) If that's the reality, that's the reality.
2) There are other weapons, as Kha points out, though their firepower is hard to determine.

[Keroko]

Shifting my stuff:

Tk? Instead of attacking the images, rambling, denying canon, and eventually give up and start pointing fingers, shouldn't you be attacking an entirely different front? After all, we only asume that the limited radius is 100 kilometers, but Yuuno doesn't say 'hyaku kilo' he says 'hyakusuujuu kilo' Possible spelling errors, I go by hearing alone and if I recal 'suujuu' means something along the lines of 'several.' Could it not be possible that Triad was simply right in their translations, and that the Arc's fire radius goes beyond 100 kilometers?

If our resident moonspeakers could shed some light on this, it would be much apreciated.

Edit: According to my sources, 'suujuu' means something along the lines of 'dozens' or 'scores of' making the radius of the Arc 'dozens of hundreds' of kilometers.

[arkhangelsk]

発動地点を中心に百数十キロ範囲の空間を歪曲させながら反応消滅を起こさせる魔道砲。

Yes it does, but not by much. It is a hundred (hyaku) and "a number of" tens. It is less than two hundred, or they'll have said two hundred and a number of tens kilometers or just "over two hundred kilometers".

Besides, since Tk's objection is philosophical, that the idea of a cannon with Blast Radius > Shooting Range (the part about inferiority to Earth is just incidental), so just squeezing a bit more blast radius out won't help.

[Tk3997]

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

Actually, on a recheck, the visual counterevidence is weak to the point of nonexistence (weaker than my memory). First, Lindy made it clear (this is not made clear in the Triad fansub) that they had to get to a safe distance before the "reaction". Second, there were several screen cuts, not a continuous scene. There was one hard cut to a zoom out as the concave field started to discharge. Then there is at least another one as the beam approached the Defense Program. Then we see the hit. Then we shift down to the ground, with a few more screencuts, and finally we head back to space to see the actual detonation. Basically, the visual cannot be said to contradict the dialogue or the DVD booklet text at all.

I don’t think that second one was a cut from firing impact I feel it simply followed the front of the beam to the target. That said if your translation of what was said is correct it’s moot and still fucking stupid.

Some Cold War nuclear torpedoes might qualify.

If fired at suicidally close range perhaps, but not if used as intended at long range no one makes a weapon that could possibly kill its crew if used as intended; because the crew will never use it.

That's like saying mage attack rounds are slower than bullets, and thus they can't be that slow.

Mage attacks are at least fast and long ranged enough to be viable weapons all the same a warship cannon with a range of less then 200km (and probably less then 20) and a blast radius just as big… is another matter entirely. This is seriously like the first time I've EVER heard of a direct fire weapon with a blast radius bigger then it's range probably because the idea is just so inherently ridiculous.

Why did you think it was a tactical weapon at all? From the moment I heard of its short range, its role as a last ditch "demolition gun" is clear. You will notice when they entered combat with Cradle, everyone used something other than Arc.

Something that seemed just as short ranged, but at least had a blast radius smaller then it's range...

What makes you think that the short range is some kind of deliberate choice, rather than a sign of the limitations and tradeoffs of the technology. Do you think the Americans loved their Mk45 ASTORs with their reputation for their 2.0 kill probability? Since this is about their last ditch anti-LL weapon, and they figure the worst of those could take out entire "worlds", one would think it is reasonable they will go for maximal firepower even at the cost of risking one of their ships (albeit only slightly since Arc is delay-fused so they can transfer away).

It actually increases the weapon's credibility as a last resort.

A demolition gun still lobs the shell far enough not to blow up the firer... My issues is I didn't really see it as such I felt it was simply the navies largest heavy weapon basiclly the 16 inch gun of the fleet. As for the choice vs technical capability issue my issue would be that I can see how such a weapon would ever be accepted into service. Plus you have to wonder if it's really worth all the bullshit I mean for all it's supposed danger they just flew in and blasted the cradle to bits with a bunch of cannons instead of Arc'ing it.

You got this shot yourself and you chose this picture? There are pics with the target onscreen just a second or so later!

Listen man it’s like 11 AM and I haven’t slept all night I took it checked it and saw it wasn’t perfect, but I’m fucking tired and it served it’s purpose.

Very well. We'll do it your way. We'll invalidate the dialogue and the text, and use your frame as the Primary Reference. Therefore, the ship does not transfer or do anything to extend the distance after shooting. Thus, the blast radius of the Arc must be smaller than the shooting range.

In that case, given a reasonable assumption of size for Asura and its obviously huge subtended width on screen, the inevitable conclusion using this frame as primary reference is that the ship is very close.

For example, if we assume target width as 200m, the subtended width as 10px (no way in heck that was only ten pixels), and a FOV of 45 degrees (a "normal" perspective"), the range comes out to ~16km. Ergo, the blast radius must be lower than 16km.

Nice, Tk, you've just killed the range and the firepower of the Arc.

The range argument is there either way you'd assume given the risk already inherent they'd be as far away as was feasible from the target and yet they they're still damn close to it. So not only is the blast radius bigger then the range the range is apparently only slightly superior to a WWII howitzer...

1) If that's the reality, that's the reality.

You know what I'm about ready to say fuck reality the more I've looked at the series the more I've started to feel that the guys writing it probably didn't think about most of this stuff through themselves and that the lot of them where military morons. Fine there biggest ship weapon has less range then a modern deck gun and will kill the firer if they're not careful, sweet awesome.

2) There are other weapons, as Kha points out, though their firepower is hard to determine.

This is rich coming from you given that as I recall you once argued that there ships were unarmed when not fitted with the Arc.

The other example we have hardly help though from what I recall the ships that fire in StrikerS are pretty much just as close as with the Arc example. (we can acutally see the entire fleet and the target in one frame and said target isn't some tiny ass dot as I recall) Basically if we go just by canon we're stuck with a absurdly short maximum engagement range on the TSAB ships mainguns. I don't think the writers spent even 30 seconds thinking through there space fleet and the shit we're stuck with is ridiculous.

Really my first post made my position clear I find pretty much everything about the Arc's use as shown absurd. Really only StrikerS makes it SLIGHTLY salvageable by showing that they have at least some other sorts of weapons without that we'd be stuck with the Arc as out only benchmark for TSAB ship weapons and oh what a shitty benchmark it is.

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by Tk3997

If fired at suicidally close range perhaps, but not if used as intended at long range no one makes a weapon that could possibly kill its crew if used as intended; because the crew will never use it.

If you kill your crew then you aren't using it as intended. You seem to completely ignore the dimensional transfer part of the weapon. Using it as intended means fire->withdraw.

Originally Posted by Tk3997

Mage attacks are at least fast and long ranged enough to be viable weapons all the same a warship cannon with a range of less then 200km (and probably less then 20) and a blast radius just as big… is another matter entirely. This is seriously like the first time I've EVER heard of a direct fire weapon with a blast radius bigger then it's range probably because the idea is just so inherently ridiculous.

And yet, the only one who thinks so seems to be... well... you. The others all see that when using it as fire->withdraw it makes perfect sense.

Originally Posted by Tk3997

A demolition gun still lobs the shell far enough not to blow up the firer... My issues is I didn't really see it as such I felt it was simply the navies largest heavy weapon basiclly the 16 inch gun of the fleet. As for the choice vs technical capability issue my issue would be that I can see how such a weapon would ever be accepted into service. Plus you have to wonder if it's really worth all the bullshit I mean for all it's supposed danger they just flew in and blasted the cradle to bits with a bunch of cannons instead of Arc'ing it.

Sheer power. The Arc-en-Ciel isn't just a blast of magic, its a weapon that distorts the space around its radius, consuming everything. In other words: we're talking of a Lost Logia level weapon here. Lost Logia aren't always items you can destroy with normal weaponry (Yami no Sho being an example) so having a weapon that can do so when one of the higher class ones gets uppity is pretty essential.

Originally Posted by Tk3997

You know what I'm about ready to say fuck reality the more I've looked at the series the more I've started to feel that the guys writing it probably didn't think about most of this stuff through themselves and that the lot of them where military morons. Fine there biggest ship weapon has less range then a modern deck gun and will kill the firer if they're not careful, sweet awesome.

The more I read stuff like this, the more I think that the true fault is you being a military maniac and actually minding this sort of thing rather then the creators not being military maniacs.

[dkellis]

The canon also shows that there is sound in space.

While I realize the irony that I'm the one tempted to say "don't examine this too closely", I think my sentiment is more of "feel free to examine this too closely, but don't swear at other people and say that they're ABSOLUTELY WRONG".

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by dkellis

The canon also shows that there is sound in space.

"In space, nobody can hear you point out that sound doesn't travel in space." ;3

Anyway, realism always takes a backseat, or at the very least a co-drivers seat, when an anime is made.

[Nagumo]

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

発動地点を中心に百数十キロ範囲の空間を歪曲させながら反応消滅を起こさせる魔道砲。

Yes it does, but not by much. It is a hundred (hyaku) and "a number of" tens. It is less than two hundred, or they'll have said two hundred and a number of tens kilometers or just "over two hundred kilometers".

Besides, since Tk's objection is philosophical, that the idea of a cannon with Blast Radius > Shooting Range (the part about inferiority to Earth is just incidental), so just squeezing a bit more blast radius out won't help.

Hm... it seems to be actually be 'several hundred kilometers' according to this line...

[arkhangelsk]

Why would it? The base is the "hundred" in this case, while the "number of tens" is then added to the behind. It is like, for example, "a hundred forty" in English.

[Kikaifan]

Man, I remember reading some book that quoted a Soviet sub captain who tried to run the Cuban blockade as saying he was going to take a shot at an American destroyer he thought was shooting at him with a nuclear torpedo and the only reason he decided not to was because the minimum safe range was based on theoretical calculations only and he didn't trust it not to take him out too.

Remember: you may owe your life to weapons with unsafe blast sizes.

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by arkhangelsk

Why would it? The base is the "hundred" in this case, while the "number of tens" is then added to the behind. It is like, for example, "a hundred forty" in English.

But concidering its not a solid number, doesn't that change the factors? After all, Japanese grammar has a tendency to have words in different order then English grammar.

[arkhangelsk]

Yes, but not in numbers. Chinese and Japanese Numbers are the same as English, with Elements consisting of Digit * Place, and the elements arrayed form largest to smallest. Where there is no digit, assume it is 1. Where there is no place, assume the element is 0.

For extra fun, consider the alternatives. If we say the Hundreds are to be multiplied by the Few Tens, the equation becomes: 100*Few*10 = 1000*Few. It is a pleasant thought for those who want big Arc blast areas, but...

Or how about 100*(Few+10) = 100*10 + 100*Few. That will make it over 1000km.

Or how about it was supposed to be 100*Few + 10 = Few*100 + 10. That will make it several hundred kilometers, but what's the point of the ten at this point when you aren't sure which hundred you are on.

You see, it is not only the grammatically correct reading, but also the sensible reading.

[JINNSK]

Originally Posted by Keroko

But concidering its not a solid number, doesn't that change the factors? After all, Japanese grammar has a tendency to have words in different order then English grammar.

I think arkhangelsk is right.In this case ,"百数十キロ"　is a meaning of under 200 kilos more than 100 kilos.

[Keroko]

Well, my main point is that suujuu is not a number, it is a word. If it was a number, I wouldn't argue, but like I said, concidering it isn't a number, doesn't that change things? The meaning of suujuu varies along the lines of 'dozens' or 'scores of' (decades too, but I think its safe to say that doesn't apply here) not just tens. Is it not posible to read it as, say, 'scores of hundreds?'