Talk:Phaser (Star Trek)

...how about more on the different types of phaser rifles? I know of about 4...the original one that looked like a type II on a stick, the voyager one (urgh) and the two post-first contact ones (look very cool)...

Why were the phaser power settings removed?

E pluribus anthony, why did you remove them? Flea110 06:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Er, sorry ... an oversight! E Pluribus Anthony 06:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So you are okay with putting them back? Flea110 00:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Before doing so, I think they should be formatted into a table and copyedited. There should also be a proviso that they apply only to TNG phasers, as later ones store more charge and are arguably more powerful (ergo, able to vapourise more rock, etc.) Perhaps you should place them here, then we can format, and finally place them in the article? E Pluribus Anthony 00:22, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. However, please keep in mind that I'm relatively unfamiliar with complex editing so I may not be of as much help as I'd like to be. Flea110 06:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Don't worry: I'm a little more familiar and will attend assist shortly. E Pluribus Anthony 06:33, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Power settings

- - Notes: Settings 1-8 can be used by all types of personnel phasers, and Settings 9-16 can only be used by Type II & III Phasers. Also, the following power settings refer only to the phasers used in Star Trek: The Next Generation (other star trek shows may show significant differences to the following list).

Setting 1 (Light Stun) - Can cause temporary central nervous system impairment for up to 5 minutes.
Setting 2 (Medium Stun) - Can make base type humanoids remain unconscious for up to 15 minutes, while resistant humanoids may be impaired for only 5.
Setting 3 (Heavy Stun) - Can cause base-type humanoids to go into a sleep for approximately 1 hour, while resistant bioforms may be rendered unconcious for up 15 minutes.
Setting 4 (Low Thermal Effects) - Can cause extensive central nervous system damage and epidermal electromagnetic trauma to base-type humanoids.
Setting 5 (High Thermal Effects) - Can cause severe burn effects to base-type humanoids.
Setting 6 (Light Disruption Effects) - Causes organic tissue to begin to exhibit molecular damage and rapid dissociation.
Setting 7 (Moderate Disruption Effects) - Causes immediate cessation of life processes.
Setting 8 (Medium Disruption Effects) - This setting is the highest setting for a Type I. It causes humanoid organisms to vaporise due to cascading disruption forces.
Setting 9 (High Disruption Effects) - Medium alloys and ceramic structual materials can be vaporised.
Setting 10 (Extreme Disruption Effects) - Heavy materials rebound the energy and is vaporised within 0.55 seconds.
Setting 11 (Slight Explosive Disruption Effects) - Causes Slight Geological Displacement and 10 m3 of rock can be decoupled with a single discharge.
Setting 12 (Light Explosive Disruption Effects) - Causes Moderate Geological Displacement as 50 m3 of rock can be decoupled with a single discharge.
Setting 13 (Moderate Explosive Disruption Effects) - Causes Medium Geological Displacement as 90 m3 of rock can be decoupled by a single discharge.
Setting 14 (Medium Explosive Disruption Effects) - Causes Heavy Geological Displacement, as 160 m3 of rock can be decoupled with a single discharge.
Setting 15 (High Explsoive Disruption Effects) - Causes Extreme Geological Displacement, as 370 m3 of rock can be decoupled with a single discharge.
Setting 16 (Extreme Explosive Disruption) - Causes Catastrophic Geological Displacement, as 650 m3 of rock can be decoupled with a single discharge.

Back Ground Section-Firepower

I know I did something wrong, as Strait so kindly pointed out, how am I supposed to fix up the section? The King's Soldier 03:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- That tidbit is informative; however, it must be sourced (i.e., from a canon source or similar) and verifiable. Now, none of us can do that and I suspect we won't at all be able to since that calculation seems to be original, which is also discouraged. First, it is somewhat rare to refer to beam output using gigatons (a la TNT explosive equivalent like nuclear weapons) but to do so with joules or watts instead. Second, I know there are various websites with calculations about the power output of the Enterprise-D's and other phasers – and the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual cites individual emitter output of 5.1 megawatts per segment, which I frankly disbelieve (given the scales of power one would assume) and differs from the calc. In any event, until you can satisfy the above, said content cannot remain in the article. Sorry! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 04:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, the phaser output and emitter numbers from the Next Generation and Deep Space Nine Technical Manual are incorrect. In the TNG episode "A Matter of Time", a variance in the power output of the second largest phaser array on the Enterprise-D could not exceed 0.06 terawatts or a chain-reaction would occcur and burn off Penthara IV's atmosphere. That is 60 gigawatts, or nearly 59 times higher than the oft-cited 1.02 gigawatts from the non-canon technical manual. We also know from "Who Watches the Watchers", that 4.2 gigawatts is enough to "power a small phaser bank". We know from the TNG episode "The Mind's Eye" that Federation phasers have efficencies of up to 86.5%, which means that the output of a small phaser bank is probably somewhere around 3.6 gigawatts. We also know from "The Mind's Eye", that a phaser rifle output is "1.05 megajoules per second", or 1.05 megawatts, which clearly contradicts the Next Generation Technical Manual's 0.01 megawatts output statement for phaser rifles.

A close-up examination of the large dorsal phaser array on the 4-foot Enterprise-D model, [1], clearly shows it has more than 200 emitter segments, at least 950. So again, the tech manuals are proven inaccurate.

Merge, or nix, phaser receiver?

I'm all for a merge; actually, I've never heard of a "phaser receiver" and, arguably, that article should be nixed instead. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 20:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A phaser receiver occurs in the TNG episode "Encounter at Farpoint". The alien which had been made into Farpoint station, went back to its natural form as its mate approached, and Picard recognized a phaser receiver on it, and that provided a quick way to feed plenty of energy back into the alien. Anthony Appleyard 14:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, this is a non-descript, completely esoteric reference in the pilot episode. The phrase "phaser receiver" is not noted in the script, nor is it in The Star Trek Encyclopedia (print or online), at the Star Trek website, or at Memory Alpha. Unless compelled otherwise, I will redirect this to the current article. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Given the above, I'm going to be bold and redirect. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But it was a reference in the episode as transmitted, and should be noted. Likely it was a very late alteration, too late to be included in the last typed version of the script. Anthony Appleyard 16:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is NO online or other mention of this and, thus, doesn't belong in the article. Until you can provide a reference corroborating this ... E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 18:01, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

set phazers to

My problem with the table: I thought there was a "kill" setting - "Disruptors" disrupt, phasers attack w/ "phased" energy...

"Kill" is probably an informal term for Setting 7, which will kill (but not 'phazorize') ordinary organic beings. The order 'set phasers to kill' would be understood by Starfleet personnell as Setting 7, or whatever setting is equivalent to it on a less powerful or more powerful model of phaser. --JaceCady 15:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Types

I do believe that Types I, II and III Phasers were used in The Original Series (TOS). The current writing of this section seems to ignore that Type I , II and III designations were used in the original series and the nicknames specifically refer to the nicknames from TNG. Daroldhiga 22:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]