Guns and Armor made simple.

[Mr. Teatime]

Good job, Prospero. I would like to add that lightsaber somehow 'cycle' their power, which is why the high-energy blade doesn't just short out after about an hour. Basically, the blade cycles power from the blade back into the power cell when it's not actually cutting anything. Although this doesn't TOTALLY recycle all power, it can be left running for months I believe without running out of power.
High levels of energy generated by a high-output Diatium power cell was unleashed through a series of focusing lenses and energizers that converted the energy into plasma.
Once focused by the crystals, the plasma was sent through a series of field energizers and modulation circuitry within the emitter matrix that further focused it, making it into a coherent beam of energy that was projected from the emitter. The blade typically extended about a meter before being arced by the blade containment field back to a negatively charged fissure ringing the emitter, where it was channeled back to the power cell by a superconductor, completing the circuit

Due to the 'containment field', which I believe is magnetic in nature, little or no energy escapes very far from the blade until it touches something. It is this field which deflects blaster bolts, not the blade itself. However, I read a lot of the books, and I will reference one of the old qui-gon and obi-wan books.

Basically, Obi-Wan had a slave collar on. Qui gon was unable to just hack it off with his lightsaber, even if done carefully at a low setting, because it would still lethally scorch his neck. Besides the transference of large amounts of thermal energy to the collar, the blade does, by itself, emit heat. When touching something, it emits more. Another example; In the New Jedi Order series (and in some other books) lightsabers are noted to smell like burning ozone, and also that when near someone's skin, usually a face or limb that they've blocked, it has been noted to burn skin or hair, or that they can feel the heat emitting from it.

Now, a Tungsten 'Durasteel' bullet, yes, that does by your calculations seem as if it wouldn't be blocked easily, if at all. However, I feel I should point out that we do not make bullets out entirely out of tungsten or even steel very often. We use lead.

A lead bullet's melting point is approx 600 K, and vape temp is 179.5 kJ·mol−1. So by your calculation that would melt at least a little, if not vaporize.

Although I also think lightsaber might be hotter than you think. Although it can cut through durasteel, they do it rather quickly and can cut through even tougher materials as well. Battle droids are durasteel plated to the point where actual metal do little or nothing, but lightsabers go right through them. Though blast doors take a bit more time, a lightsaber was still able to put a giant smoking orange-hot hole in one by stabbing it and leaving the blade in.

Any opinions?

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Any opinions?

Arguing the pyhsical properties of a fictional weapon in a galaxy that obviously has different standards of highly advanced technology that was never actually written about because it's a ****ing movie series is stupid, and trying to win an arguement using our understanding of scientific technology, rather than their advanced understanding of scientific technologies appearing in star wars (that again we don't have written anywhere) rather than using what was shown to work in the movies/books/generally accepted canon is beyond retarded.

Not aiming that at any one specific person, but I mean...

 

[Green Ranger]

Arguing the pyhsical properties of a fictional weapon in a galaxy that obviously has different standards of highly advanced technology that was never actually written about because it's a ****ing movie series is stupid, and trying to win an arguement using our understanding of scientific technology, rather than their advanced understanding of scientific technologies appearing in star wars (that again we don't have written anywhere) rather than using what was shown to work in the movies/books/generally accepted canon is beyond retarded.

Not aiming that at any one specific person, but I mean...

Bingo. Also, Star Wars isn't even sci-fi, it's space opera - and that's a really important distinction, because in a sci-fi series the numerous technologies would have been explored and explained in depth, and based off of scientific principles.

Space opera is just about making shit cool. It doesn't have to be logical, scientifically accurate or make much sense - hell we've got laser swords powered by rocks ffs.

 

[BLADE]

The Doctor: I don't think I'm trying to win an argument. Just clarifying what would likely be the effects of a weapon. Insofar as the technology issue, that really is irrelevant. We presume (and see) physical effects in the SW universe that are easily compatible with those in ours. Indeed, some canon-stuff (Incredible Cross Sections) is actually based on that.

Insofar as canon, I see these methods as supplementing canon and sometimes clarifying what can be muddled, contradictory, etc. It's one more tool in many. So I don't particularly see it as "beyond retarded" but you know, pota-toe, pota-toh.


Arcturus: That post was actually very simplified from what I did come up with (I'm such a huge nerd that obsessing over thermodynamics is a break for me from studying for the bar exam.) I came up with the Kelvin figure for the lightsaber based on some ICS presumptions (where blasters, etc. are rated in the megawatt range.)

I think there's plenty of room for disagreement, but I think my lightsaber estimate is a pretty good one.

I'll agree with you on the oscillation mechanism (I actually did take hertz cycles into consideration when estimating lightsaber power which came into the hundreds of megawatts) but will add that I think said magnetic field, in addition to oscillating with time, also oscillates when hitting something solid (barring blasters bolts which are just more plasma, essentially) and that this explains some of the lightsaber effects mentioned (so a lightsaber can be held near someone's face, since the radiant effect is dampened by the magnetic field but you do get the smell of ozone and some steaming effects (see the Episode 3 novelization) when sabers hit something or even each other.)

Anyhow, it's a range of estimates. Playing around with the numbers, I got into the upper 2000 K, which would start to boil lead (thermodynamic effects for an evaporation rate are trickier and not something I would want to model here for the sake of this particular debate unless people felt it was absolutely necessary.)

It's also worth noting that it's just as likely that the SW universe has moved on to other alloys/composite materials to use for their slugs and bullets and that these materials would likely have far greater thermal resistivity than lead.

With that being said, I do think there's a range where certain types of bullets would partially melt (but their momentum wouldn't really be lost, so you'd have molten metal flying at you rather than a solid projectile.)

And that's not mentioning the competitive balance that the timeline wants to foster. Slugthrowers and other similar projectiles are a good vulnerability for the Jedi which can be countered to varying extents with armor, force speed, and other sundry force abilities. That would ultimately be up to the admins to adjudicate, but as I have said, it's really not about being a force user or not (though ceteris paribus and increasingly at the higher levels they will have something of an advantage) as it comes down to the skill of the RPer, the needs of the story, what is funnest for everyone, and so forth when deciding how a theoretical throwdown would play out.

And I don't have a pertinent model for those factors. :CSly


Green Ranger: I don't see anything wrong with supplementing our understanding of the universe whenever possible and beneficial with logic and science. I'm all for coolness and the story ruling (indeed that's my personal ethos) whenever possible. But in issues of competitive balance, what is cool for one person may not be cool for another. Science and logic, when applicable, help to take some of the subjectivity out of the interpretation and make it easier for people to come to a consensus.

But those are just my two cents. If the decision is that lightsabers can evaporate slug throwers and whatnot, I take no issue with it (though I do think it's OOCly a good opportunity for greater competitive balance.) I was just pointing out that science can (as it does on so many issues) enlighten us. It's not really a question of theme or not, or of how ridiculous the technology is to us. Surprisingly enough, a lot of what is SW tech would be feasible providing you had a far superior tech base (and that isn't really an issue, n'est pas?)

The lightsaber argument is a bit silly. If you were to explain even to a very educated person a thousand or so years ago that we were using essentially mineral wafers to conduct lightning to substitute numbers to tell a machine how to think like a person, it would sound essentially as far-fetched a description as yours of a lightsaber does.

 

[Green Ranger]

Green Ranger: I don't see anything wrong with supplementing our understanding of the universe whenever possible with logic and science. I'm all for coolness and the story ruling (indeed that's my personal ethos) whenever possible. But in issues of competitive balance, what is cool for one person may not be cool for another. Science and logic, when applicable, help to take some of the subjectivity out of the interpretation and make it easier for people to come to a consensus.

But those are just my two cents. If the decision is that lightsabers can evaporate slug throwers and whatnot, I take no issue with it (though I do think it's OOCly a good opportunity for greater competitive balance.) I was just pointing out that science can (as it does on so many issues) enlighten us.

There's a massive, massive difference between looking at competetive balance and what this thread's mutated into. Playing 'who knows more about science' doesn't work when you're trying to apply it to something like a lightsaber, which exists outside of science.

 

[BLADE]

I can only speak for myself, but I don't really see it that way. Even just getting into philosophy of science issues (I'm a Karl Poppler fan, and yes I realize I bore many of you, bear with me), science doesn't really provide certainty, indeed science is unable to provide certainty because induction at the end of the day relies on premises that are inherently unverifiable (that past is prologue and that induction itself implies anything more than random data.)

With that being said, I didn't really put down that disclaimer, though I did note that the calculations were based on certain assumptions and had a range of plausible outcomes. For that I apologize, though I believe it was implied.

In any case, I don't believe the calculations should necessarily be taken as gospel in any decision about competitive balance, as I believe that certain concerns are going to usually outweigh science and logic, but I don't see how using it to occasionally supplement or outline a discussion is a problem. Certainly I don't see it here, nor did I see it when Jiang was using essentially scientific principles to explain why certain ammunition doesn't make much in-universe sense.

I can see how it might be an issue in the sense that the language of science and logic is not (sadly) a universal and always necessarily a mutually beneficial language. Some people are not going to be able to delve into certain arguments. And that's not a bad thing or a fault of them. I certainly don't mean to be elitist about this. But the same can be said about subjective factors like "coolness" or what's is expedient for the story. Not everyone speaks in the language of theme or literary tropes either.

So yeah. I don't really see what the issue here is. I contributed some clarifying information about a lightsaber using, of course, assumptions. Nothing mentioned is inherently outside of science just as none of the assumptions made are inherently foolproof. Science is basically about making (hopefully) educated assumptions based on a buttload of data. And nothing really makes it incumbent for anyone to take my calculations as anything more than a fun (I am a huge nerd as I have mentioned) little exercise in quantification that might add some argumentative power to one side and hopefully prove a little bit more explicative to others.

Edit: Anyhow, my apologies for my role in dragging this a bit off-topic. With that being said, I'd like to hear about potential countermeasures against sonic weapons. I know they're out there (see Geonosis Arena) and I'm thinking of making a character that might tangle with them occasionally. Insights help!

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

The Doctor: I don't think I'm trying to win an argument. Just clarifying what would likely be the effects of a weapon. Insofar as the technology issue, that really is irrelevant. We presume (and see) physical effects in the SW universe that are easily compatible with those in ours. Indeed, some canon-stuff (Incredible Cross Sections) is actually based on that.

Insofar as canon, I see these methods as supplementing canon and sometimes clarifying what can be muddled, contradictory, etc. It's one more tool in many. So I don't particularly see it as "beyond retarded" but you know, pota-toe, pota-toh.

Like I said, it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, the fact you took it as such is raaaather telling though. So is the giant blocks of texts, and the fact that you want to be a lawyer. :P

But the point is more that what we see as compatible in the star wars universe are only assumptions. I think the fact that we relate death sticks often enough to cigarrettes is proof of this (when if fact death sticks actually kill you in like, ten of them, and are like smoking crack, rather than cigarrettes I /still/ see people "lighting them up" in various threads from time to time.) Looks similar, but for those who didn't study up on them, they use them incorrectly.

The same can be said for any kind of technology, without the proper knowledge there of, it's only assumption, nothing more, and since some tech simply doesn't have anything written other than "this goes boom" or the like, you can't argue from a place of knowledge that A+B=C.

 

[Orphen]

I didn't say that they were nuclear. Just because something rips a particle apart doesn't make it nuclear. Hell lightning rips particles apart and isn't nuclear! And ALL the visual evidence supperts it. Because when a lightsaber hits anything 'but a blast door' the evidence supports it not melting from the heat, but 'disappearing' from the heat, leaving nice red lines to either side of it.

and yeah, as much as science goes for it, it's a laser beam frozen in space by X technology. IT'S FROZEN IN SPACE! I assume something like the supercooled magnetic superconducter thing, except done to a laser... i never said lightsabers weren't hot... but i always assumed that lightsabers 'vrrooooom' ing around was the sound of their effect on particles, because its not moving as fast as a lightning bolt as too collide with many, they energize and move out of the way from the core of the blade so's not to make a sonic boom. / my reasoning.

I also never said bullets weren't an effective counter, they are. But I don't see why I'm still gettin grilled even though i stopped... --_--''

GG no RE

And i'm much mroe of a Charles Fort fan, science chooses to ignore a lot of things in its calculations, and rules things to its own devices a lot. I'm always dubious when it comes to scientific theories because of what they've ignored. Though, mathmatics is sound. I trust you mathmatics >.<

 

[BLADE]

Like I said, it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, the fact you took it as such is raaaather telling though. So is the giant blocks of texts, and the fact that you want to be a lawyer. :P

Well, I'm a pretty decent hand with math, and the way I read it, you were either referring to myself, Arcturus or Jiang. I don't think either of the latter gentlemen need me to defend them, but I did want to clarify what I said. I'll also be the first to admit that I am a boring fogy and prolix too.

Why? Well, I'm not that smart and English ain't my first language. :CHappy

But the point is more that what we see as compatible in the star wars universe are only assumptions. I think the fact that we relate death sticks often enough to cigarrettes is proof of this (when if fact death sticks actually kill you in like, ten of them, and are like smoking crack, rather than cigarrettes I /still/ see people "lighting them up" in various threads from time to time.) Looks similar, but for those who didn't study up on them, they use them incorrectly.

There are a few problems with that argument, but since part of my purview is ridiculous hypotheticals, let me address the analogy first. Looking at something that looks like a cigarette and saying that it is a cigarette is not scientific. There are no calculations, no theories, no modeling, no room for error even (as is implied in a range of calculations.) Science can never provide anything but assumptions, however rigorously tested. However, what you refer to is observation rather than induction. It is like taking one step of the scientific method, and then just stopping.

The same can be said for any kind of technology, without the proper knowledge there of, it's only assumption, nothing more, and since some tech simply doesn't have anything written other than "this goes boom" or the like, you can't argue from a place of knowledge that A+B=C.

But my broader point is that by this logic, we shouldn't even be roleplaying. Since roleplaying is by definition speculative. Ah, but certain things are universal, you might say. Well are they? The fact is we really don't know, and if you're going to hold science to the standard of the failure of induction, you might as well chuck the rest.

Of course you don't think that, nor does anyone else here, but that's my point. I'm not advocating using science for everything and anything. Nor am I saying that all calculations are correct and unassailable.

I just think that when striking a balance between a scientific approach and a more literary one, of course the latter is going to dominate, but it's always useful to judiciously examine the balance. I certainly think (being a NEEEEEEEEEEERD) that science can have a useful role insofar as it isn't abused.

I know it's your style buddy and we're free to agree to disagree, but I just dislike it when any position is reduced to being "retarded." I'll freely admit to being kinda dumb, but I do put some thought into my posts, y'know.

I didn't say that they were nuclear. Just because something rips a particle apart doesn't make it nuclear. Hell lightning rips particles apart and isn't nuclear! And ALL the visual evidence supperts it. Because when a lightsaber hits anything 'but a blast door' the evidence supports it not melting from the heat, but 'disappearing' from the heat, leaving nice red lines to either side of it.

The preponderance of the visual evidence shows cauterization and other epiphemonena related to heat transfer. Insofar as nuclear, I think you're misunderstanding me. By splitting particles, you are affecting them on the nuclear level. All that really means.

Anyhow, I disagree, but I'm willing to be convinced if you have any evidence for such a notion. It's certainly an interesting theory.

and yeah, as much as science goes for it, it's a laser beam frozen in space by X technology. IT'S FROZEN IN SPACE! I assume something like the supercooled magnetic superconducter thing, except done to a laser... i never said lightsabers weren't hot... but i always assumed that lightsabers 'vrrooooom' ing around was the sound of their effect on particles, because its not moving as fast as a lightning bolt as too collide with many, they energize and move out of the way from the core of the blade so's not to make a sonic boom. / my reasoning.

There's actually plenty of theoretical ways to make a lightsaber. For example, for a magnetic field that locks down the plasma arc, the main problem simply from a theoretical point of view (I won't get into the engineering aspects) would be having enough power to maintain such a field. But hypermatter is far far more powerful than even cold fusion would theoretically be.

Your theory could probably work. Or not. Speculative.

I also never said bullets weren't an effective counter, they are. But I don't see why I'm still gettin grilled even though i stopped... --_--''

I just wanted to clarify the debate. It wasn't particularly aimed at anyone else, and I thought it was a handy way to head off unnecessarily acrimonious conflict by introducing some measure of quantifiability to the debate. I am fully aware of the irony of how in not trying to start conflict, I have started a conflict. Apologies.

And i'm much mroe of a Charles Fort fan, science chooses to ignore a lot of things in its calculations, and rules things to its own devices a lot. I'm always dubious when it comes to scientific theories because of what they've ignored. Though, mathmatics is sound. I trust you mathmatics >.<

I like Charles Fort, but the problem isn't even necessarily with science (insofar as one can ignore the problems of induction, data collection, etc.) The problem as you (and he) identified it lies more with scientists. Scientists are no more immune to magical thinking, pseudoscience, unnecessary conjecture, data manipulation, etc. than anyone else barring judicious and continuous self-examination.

As far as mathematics, well mathematics has its own foundational issues and the philosophy of mathematics is evolving. Not only does induction come into play, but mathematics is itself a mediation of the study of that induction which entails even greater issues (Do we go with order set theory? Constructivism? etc.)

But thank you. I'll take a compliment when I can get it.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

Honestly there's way to much "i'm saying X but not saying X" and putting words in my mouth in your reply to warrant me wasting time with a proper reply. This is why I tend to stay out of debates on here, because even when there's stuff in 'em that's smart they're still mostly just ridiculousness.

 

[BLADE]

My position has been consistent and I had a possible response and development of your argument... once in that reply. Incidentally, that's a fairly common rhetorical trope but toma-to, toma-toh.

*Shrugs*

As I have said, you're free to disagree but it's a bit unreasonable to jump into a thread, call anyone's position "beyond retarded" (whilst misinterpreting what was going on with regards to being cognizant and duly respectful of canon materials) and then not expect some (mild and vaguely professorial) push-back. In any case, I'm sorry you feel that way and I suppose we'll agree to disagree.

But I digress.

Sonic weaponry vis-a-vis Jedi. Design insights, etc?

 

[Xyrael]

Sonic weaponry uses sound waves to strike a foe. Sound waves travel through different mediums differently. Pressurized air diminishes the speed that sound travels and no doubt would diminish the strength of the attack itself, making a Force Push a viable reducer of the attacks strength. (Afterall, the justification for why Anakin and Obi-Wan blasted apart was the air pocket between their Force Pushes collapsed) You'd no doubt still be hit though, in general I'd say dodging is best. However, Force Deflect was used by a variety of characters against a variety of attacks and, despite a sonic wave being a mild area attack, I think Force Deflect might be able to deflect the attack, or even redirect it back at your foe (though that takes skill)

As for the lightsaber and the bullet, correct me if I'm wrong but the lightsaber is superheated plasma burning as hot as the surface of the sun, perhaps even hotter if we assume it operates like a plasma arc, correct? Matter changes states based on temperature, and melts at higher temperatures, but is outright vaporized into gas at extreme temperatures. Granted, exposure to high temperature is required to heat the solid itself, and a bullet travels VERY fast, but assuming that a lightsaber is constructed of matter in a state of superheated plasma then could it not feasibly disintegrate the bullet before it passed through the weapon? Similar to how ray shields would disintegrate a human despite not being specifically designed to stop material objects?

 

[BLADE]

There might be an issue of range with regards to sonics. And controlling spread would require some sort of emitter, so I dunno how useful it would be for this bounty-hunter fellow I'm developing. But good info. One possible counter-measure would be simply to send a wave of similar amplitude at the wave, thus canceling it out. A Jedi with sufficient physics knowledge (like Plo Koon) could pull it off.

Anyhow, insofar as a lightsaber is concerned, I actually made it somewhat hotter than the surface of the sun in my calculations (8000K as opposed to 5800K.) To answer your query, thermodynamics can be tricky (heat modeling can drive one to passion and to madness in equal measure), but assuming a lightsaber as plasma blade model (as I did) it would require considerably higher heat and other different variables to cause disintegration.

Mind you, there's any number of mechanisms in the lightsaber that could be exogenous to this particular model or exist outside of any lightsaber conceptions mentioned in this thread and which could allow for disintegration. As I have mentioned, any use of science should be used as a fun tool (I can't be the only physics nerd here, n'est pas?) that might educate people on certain issues. Certainly it should be (very, very) ancillary to other concerns like OOC balance, story needs, etc.

tl;dr

Sure, there's probably some model of a lightsaber where (not necessarily heat transfer related effects) result in disintegration, but ultimately this sort of thing will be adjudicated on the basis of what is best for the story, fun RPing, etc.

 

[Orphen]

A bullet wouldn't 'pass through' a lightsaber anyways. Lightsabers are a solid mass as shown by everything, which uses a heat capable of penetrating anything. Which is why lightsaber resistant materials clash with a saber and not pass through causing a rather funny looking double kill. (SW funniest home videos material)

though that being said, it makes it even more lethal to a lightsaber wielder. If a bullet connects with the solid mass, causing a knockback effect, the chances of the Jedi loosing his grip on the blade and it cutting through themselves. Bad news bears indeed!

 

[BLADE]

I would argue that certain materials will pass and certain materials will not. The properties you brought up, Nite, seem to have more to do with the inherent anti-lightsaber properties of certain materials (like cortosis.)

Were I to have my druthers balancing wise, I would make it so that certain bullets of certain alloys will bounce off (transferring considerable momentum to the Jedi/Sith/whatever.) And others will not. ICly and OOCly, that would make it so that clever PCs/RPers could find ways to exploit that in either direction.

 

[Xyrael]

A bullet wouldn't 'pass through' a lightsaber anyways. Lightsabers are a solid mass as shown by everything, which uses a heat capable of penetrating anything. Which is why lightsaber resistant materials clash with a saber and not pass through causing a rather funny looking double kill. (SW funniest home videos material)

though that being said, it makes it even more lethal to a lightsaber wielder. If a bullet connects with the solid mass, causing a knockback effect, the chances of the Jedi loosing his grip on the blade and it cutting through themselves. Bad news bears indeed!

Hey. I thought lightsabers were *cough* massless. Actually they also tend to have electric properties such as shorting out in water or absorbing electricity like lightning. But they aren't solid, because that kind of solid mass can't just be created and destroyed willy nilly by activating or turning off a lightsaber.

Id argue a lightsaber is an inert, ionized and superheated gas through which an electric current passes (electricity maintains ionization perhaps) contained within a containment field that also traps heat as well as the gas. How long a lightsaber would need to stay in contact with a bullet to disintegrate it is something id like to know, but in all seriousness the Force is a better defense against bullets than lightsabers... modifying the trajectory of a bullet by a millimeter at the barrel can result in inches or feet or innaccuracy at the target.

 

[Indou Selprin]

I find it somewhat interesting that people are saying science doesn't apply to lightsabers. I've seen this in many places, so I'm not singling anyone out, but we have already been able to make "lightsabers".

Scientists have generated plasma and kept it contained within small EM fields to create the same effect. The only issue? The high power demands means it currently takes a room full of equipment. Sound familiar?

 

[BLADE]

Xy: That's generally been my thesis as well.

As far as how long it would take to disintegrate a bullet? Well, according to my model (and all caveats apply), a lightsaber generates 4.6 million Kelvin of heat per second. So a very small fraction of a second would be enough to disintegrate most materials. Problem is that bullets travel far faster than even that.

 

[GABA]

This is slightly late on the topic. But for sonic weapons, your best bet is to avoid them. There was a book, I believe Barriss Offee mentions in which ever Medstar book, but she narrates about the Battle of Geonosis and how they could still feel the effects of the sonic blaster even with absorbing them with their lightsaber.

I think, though its been a while since I read any Star Wars novels, but I am pretty positive the Jedi suggested just to avoid them.

 

[Jiang Winters]

I think GABA hit the mark. I have a technical manual for SW weaponry around here somewhere, and I remember it stating that they're incredibly dangerous and very difficult to deflect or stop without highly specialized equipment. That said, they're so short-ranged that you're usually better off just retreating and attacking from afar with, say, a blaster pistol or slugthrower. But for underwater work, it's hard to beat a sonic weapon.