Comment Re:I agree, except: (Score 1) 390
We're too stuck on the idea that technology *must* progress rapidly, but that's an artefact of our time in history.
Plausibly in the Star Wars universe, fundamental science is effectively settled, so there are no new innovations to be found through new scientific discoveries (like we shrink transistors, or build better solar panels, or eventually figure out room temperature superconductors). I believe the lore states that hyperdrives and blasters have been around for millennia. That suggests the science behind this stuff as firm as it'll ever get.
Instead, technological progress comes in the form of devices changing form to prioritise things like manufacturing, supply, economics and changes in 'market' dynamics - such as noticing Rebel fighters start using shields, so producing more TIEs with shields in response, which might cost more but be an effective strategy, until, for example, the Rebels recruit millions of new pilots and turn to building more inexpensive shieldless fighters, and so it goes.
Lightsaber changes might be better explained through signalling - like knights' swords and armour could be embellished to mark their station - so too do individual Sith customise their 'sabers to maximise recognition and intimidation (Jedi are probably beneath this stuff).
Just a thought.
Plausibly in the Star Wars universe, fundamental science is effectively settled, so there are no new innovations to be found through new scientific discoveries (like we shrink transistors, or build better solar panels, or eventually figure out room temperature superconductors). I believe the lore states that hyperdrives and blasters have been around for millennia. That suggests the science behind this stuff as firm as it'll ever get.
Instead, technological progress comes in the form of devices changing form to prioritise things like manufacturing, supply, economics and changes in 'market' dynamics - such as noticing Rebel fighters start using shields, so producing more TIEs with shields in response, which might cost more but be an effective strategy, until, for example, the Rebels recruit millions of new pilots and turn to building more inexpensive shieldless fighters, and so it goes.
Lightsaber changes might be better explained through signalling - like knights' swords and armour could be embellished to mark their station - so too do individual Sith customise their 'sabers to maximise recognition and intimidation (Jedi are probably beneath this stuff).
Just a thought.