This is Not the Petition you are Looking For

  • Thread starter Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility and implications of constructing a fictional "Death Star," as referenced in a White House response to a petition. Participants explore various aspects of this concept, including costs, technical specifications, and comparisons to existing space structures like the International Space Station (ISS).

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant cites the estimated cost of constructing a Death Star as over $850 quadrillion, questioning the practicality of such an investment.
  • Another participant argues that a starfighter can indeed be used for long-distance travel, referencing Luke Skywalker's journey.
  • Some participants challenge the feasibility of a starfighter traveling without a hyperdrive, expressing skepticism about its capabilities.
  • There is a humorous assertion that the free market could construct a Death Star for a significantly lower cost than government estimates.
  • One participant comments on the limitations of smaller objects generating enough energy to destroy a planet, suggesting that such an endeavor would be self-defeating.
  • Discussion includes a light-hearted critique of the ISS in comparison to the destructive capabilities of the Death Star.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the technical aspects of starfighter capabilities and the economic feasibility of building a Death Star. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference fictional elements from the Star Wars universe, which may influence their arguments and assumptions about technology and costs.

Messages
23,873
Reaction score
11,325
OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO
Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.
This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For
By Paul Shawcross

The Administration shares your desire for job creation and a strong national defense, but a Death Star isn't on the horizon. Here are a few reasons:

-The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.
-The Administration does not support blowing up planets.
-Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?
-However, look carefully (here's how) and you'll notice something already floating in the sky -- that's no Moon, it's a Space Station! Yes, we already have a giant, football field-sized International Space Station in orbit around the Earth...
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...d-begin-construction-death-star-2016/wlfKzFkN

A starfighter is not a starship, but otherwise, well done!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
russ_watters said:
A starfighter is not a starship

Sure it is. Luke took one from Hoth all the way to Dagobah.
 
Without a hyperdrive? I find that hard to believe.
 
ISS...pffft. When they can vaporise Alderaan, then they can talk. :rolleyes:
 
russ_watters said:
Without a hyperdrive? I find that hard to believe.

That is why you fail. :P

X-wings do have hyperdrives:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-wing#Depiction
Lacking an on-board navigation computer, they rely on an astromech droid to calculate hyperspace jumps. The presence of a hyperdrive and deflector shields differentiate the X-wing from the Empire's TIE fighters
 
Last edited:
On the other hand, anything smaller than a planet, that would generate the energy required to blow up said planet, would instead blow itself up.
 
The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000.
That's if the govt builds it. The free market could make it for $9.95.
Death Star.
 

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K