(Created page with 'I think it's absurd to consider this gate to be truly bigger. It does not make sense technically, and it's taking O'neill's words down to the letter. At best, the ring may be le...') |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I think it's absurd to consider this gate to be truly bigger. It does not make sense technically, and it's taking O'neill's words down to the letter. |
I think it's absurd to consider this gate to be truly bigger. It does not make sense technically, and it's taking O'neill's words down to the letter. |
||
| − | |||
At best, the ring may be less large, but the event horizon should in all logic be of the same diameter on all stargates, to avoid compatibility issues. |
At best, the ring may be less large, but the event horizon should in all logic be of the same diameter on all stargates, to avoid compatibility issues. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Revision as of 02:24, 27 June 2009
I think it's absurd to consider this gate to be truly bigger. It does not make sense technically, and it's taking O'neill's words down to the letter. At best, the ring may be less large, but the event horizon should in all logic be of the same diameter on all stargates, to avoid compatibility issues. This article is way too categorical and could prove problematic and deceitful for anyone trying to obtain reliable information. --Mister Oragahn 02:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)