Trek Space Combat Ranges

Post by **Graham Kennedy** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 1:18 am

All of which is why I say that we should us a little common sense.

Think about it. Do you REALLY think the intent of Star Trek is that these ships of the future should be limited to ranges far less than present day weapons? I doubt anybody can honestly say yes to that.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:14 pm

Yes, but if we just assumed that the intention of common sense was behind all the glaring errors or nonsensical bits we see, what would we complain about?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:32 pm

GrahamKennedy wrote:Think about it. Do you REALLY think the intent of Star Trek is that these ships of the future should be limited to ranges far less than present day weapons? I doubt anybody can honestly say yes to that.

I've no doubt that the intention was that they should have spectacular ranges, and be invulnerable to all but the most powerful weapons. What we got was combat at spitting distance and ships in danger of being destroyed by the equivalent of a few kg of HE.

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:58 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:I've no doubt that the intention was that they should have spectacular ranges, and be invulnerable to all but the most powerful weapons. What we got was combat at spitting distance and ships in danger of being destroyed by the equivalent of a few kg of HE.

Please remind me to do my own math when I get my own show.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:05 pm

No. I might remind you to your maths though.

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:16 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:No. I might remind you to your maths though.

I'm sorry, not being British, I don't do "maths".

I do "math".

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:39 pm

Mathematics is plural, therefore its abbreviation must also be plural. Simple grammar.

Nickswitz · Post by **Nickswitz** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:39 pm

Oh, but your using common sense. We're using american english...

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:43 pm

Nickswitz wrote:Oh, but your using common sense. We're using american english...

You're using American. Whether or not it can be called any form of English is debatable. The English language possesses the letter "u" and is not obsessed with the letter "z".

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:59 pm

Nickswitz wrote:Oh, but your using common sense. We're using american english...

Exactly. As stupid as it is, no one over here calls it "doing maths", and they probably never will. *shrug*

Although, in the singular, it's a "mathematical" calculation, which doesn't seem to be plural.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:01 pm

Because a single calculation is (of course) singular. The discipline as a whole covers multiple areas, and so requires the plural.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:23 pm

Right. You remember the letter "u" - where it isn't needed as in "cheque." And you don't obssess over "z" - even where it is indicated, as in "analyse." Yeah, you've got the monopoly on common sense in morphology alright.

Post by **Tsukiyumi** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:39 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:Because a single calculation is (of course) singular. The discipline as a whole covers multiple areas, and so requires the plural.

Well, since I don't know the whole discipline, and only do singular equations, I stand by my assertion that I do "math".

SomosFuga · Post by **SomosFuga** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:53 am

In spanish you can use singular or plural: matemÃ¡tica or matemÃ¡ticas. We usually use the singular.

Lt. Staplic · Post by **Lt. Staplic** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:37 am

Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges

Re: Trek Space Combat Ranges