# Sci-Fi weapons **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 11, 2006, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428 "2006-05-11T21:47:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sleel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/73ab20/32.png) [@Sleel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sleel)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/21 "2006-05-12T07:57:39Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Would it superheat fluids and make the person explode? Bingo. Any laser that would have enough energy to, say, burn a hole straight through someone would dump that energy into tissue in a small fraction of a second. Superheated steam from the fluids would expand quite rapidly (probably producing more bang for your volume of solid than standard gunpowder) making a real mess. Cleanup in an enclosed space like a building or ship would probably involve more firehose and wet-dry vac than stretcher and shovel. For Star Wars tech, the [Technical Commentaries](http://www.theforce.net/swtc/index.html) probably feature way more detail than you’d ever want to know. ---
**Author:** ![Sleel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/73ab20/32.png) [@Sleel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sleel)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/22 "2006-05-12T08:10:42Z")
Sorry for the double post, but after looking for a while, I finally found a site that I saw long ago that had a metric tonne of information and theories about lightsabers, [Robert Brown’s](http://web.archive.org/web/20000815220747/www.synicon.com.au/sw/ls/sabres.htm) now defunct web page. ---
**Author:** ![RunSilent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e0b2c6/32.png) [@RunSilent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RunSilent)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/23 "2006-05-12T11:42:10Z")
Someone has to say it, might as well be me… **1920s Style Death Rays** … best weapon available (!) ---
**Author:** ![Crescend](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Crescend](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crescend)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/24 "2006-05-12T13:21:18Z")
> [@](#): > > I should mention that gravitational technology, so popular in many SF works, is probably just a pipe dream. The usual assumption is that we can manipulate gravitational fields just as we manipulate electric and magnetic fields. Well, that’s true, in a way, but it doesn’t get you much: The way we manipulate electric and magnetic fields is ultimately by moving charges around. So the equivalent for gravitational fields would be to move masses around. But while the charges needed for electromagnetism are manageable, the masses needed for practical gravitational effects are planetary in scale. In other words, if you want a gravity generator on your starship, all you need to do is carry the Earth around with you. Now, I’ll not rule out the possibility of practical gravity control, since a good scientist is loathe to ever definitively rule out anything. But there’s absolutely nothing to indicate that it would be possible. Well, there has been some [interesting](http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html) work in that regard. [Link: ESA] ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/25 "2006-05-12T13:33:13Z")
> [@xizor](#): > > [plasma rifle](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_rifle) So apparently a plasma weapon would essentially be similar in concept to a plasma arc welder with much longer range. The trick being to project the hot ionized gas some distance. IIRC the “blasters” from Star Wars and weapons from shows like Farscape would technically be plasma weapons not lasers. They shoot some kind of charged gas held in place by some kind of force field, not a steady beam or photons (laser) or particles (particle beam). ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/26 "2006-05-12T15:16:26Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Would it superheat fluids and make the person explode? Drill right through in a blink? Steam explosion :eek: Not sure what the watts/cc’s of boiled water ratio is but theres gotta be a doper that can pull that out off the top of their head. I do know the expansion ratio of water to steam is something like 1400:1 at atmospheric pressure. Flashboil a couple CC’s of water in someones tissues…its gonna leave a mark. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/27 "2006-05-12T15:53:33Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Pretty sure bomb-pumped lasers would work with today’s technology if you really wanted to build one. Essentially the very, very start of an atomic explosion is a crapload of x-rays. Focus those at something and you have an x-ray laser. The advantage is you get very high energy levels out of the x-ray laser. The disadvantage of course is you just exploded a nuke so you had better not be anywhere near (that and the weapon destroys itself so it only gets one shot). > > This was proposed for Reagan’s Star Wars system as an anti-ballistic missile defense. Orbiting nukes not to mention the damage caused by setting them off in orbit saw the idea fall flat but I think they think it could be done. See my post #5 above… there’s considerable doubt that the one test of the idea even produced any lasing at all, much less something with the capacity to be a weapon. It’s an idea that is a _theorhetical possibility_ that an X-ray laser could be produced. We don’t really have any evidence that the idea works at this point. I’m totally with you on sci-fi authors adjusting the size of weaponry to make it convenient, though. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2006, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/28 "2006-05-12T18:13:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Well, there has been some interesting work in that regard. [Link: ESA] I had not previously heard of this work. Off the top of my head, I’d say that the most likely explanation is some sort of electromagnetic interference, not a gravitational effect: EM is so much stronger than gravity, that even a very small electromagnetic effect could easily mask a very large gravitational effect (that is, small compared to typical EM effects, and large compared to typical gravitational effects). The effect described in the article also bears a striking resemblence to the thouroughly discredited “lifter” ideas. But I’ll have to look a bit closer at this. ---
**Author:** ![Hail\_Ants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/dc4da7/32.png) [@Hail\_Ants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hail_Ants)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/29 "2006-05-13T02:44:05Z")
I’ve always though James Cameron got it right with his very reality derived projectile-based (i.e. bullets) weapons in Aliens. They weren’t just a fanboy kitbash, but based on a lot of solid concepts, primarily the advantages of [caseless ammo](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caseless_ammunition) such as: [ul] [li]extremely high rate of fire with less heat buildup[/li][li]much lighter ammunition[/li][li]semi-sealed breeches to improve reliability[/li][li]electronic detonation vs. mechanical (fewer moving parts)[/li][/ul] One of the most awesome aspects of the new Battlestar Galactica is that their fighters aren’t armed with goofy orange lasers but nuke-tipped guided missles and, even better, good old fashioned machine guns! Because if you think about it, barring the existance of any kind of force fields (which are still **highly** improbable) there’s no real reason advanced projectile weapons wouldn’t be just as effective as energy based ones. Sort of makes me think of the movies of the British and their single shot carbines trying to fight off the natives and their mass spear/arrow volleys… ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/30 "2006-05-13T04:23:07Z")
Didn’t the British usually win those fights…? 🙂 -XT ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/31 "2006-05-13T22:02:51Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > Because if you think about it, barring the existance of any kind of force fields (which are still **highly** improbable) there’s no real reason advanced projectile weapons wouldn’t be just as effective as energy based ones. Well there is the fact that an energy weapons beam travels many orders of magnitude faster than any projectile. This would be important considering the speeds and distances at whcih space based warships or fighters would engage each other. The GAU-8 Avenger cannon mounted on the A-10 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8) has a muzzle velocity of just under 1km per second. Even with no drag in space, two ships engageing each other from 10-20 km apart, it would take 10-20 seconds for the bullets to reach their target. A particle beam armed ship could theoretically vaporize the bullets before they even reach their target. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/32 "2006-05-13T22:11:43Z")
> [@Hail Ants](#): > > Because if you think about it, barring the existance of any kind of force fields (which are still **highly** improbable) there’s no real reason advanced projectile weapons wouldn’t be just as effective as energy based ones. Energy weapons would have the advantage of not needing ammo. Ammo is heavy and takes up space and you can run out of it. If you had some reliable power source (ala a fusion reactor [if they existed]) on board your ship that will run for years then you can fire you energy weapons pretty much as much as you’d like. No need for reloads, no wear and tear on the weapon, no worry about a lucky shot detonating your ammo magazine, all that storage space freed for other uses…energy weapons could be handy. ---
**Author:** ![Fish\_Cheer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fish_cheer/32/17179_2.png) [@Fish\_Cheer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish_Cheer)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2006, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/33 "2006-05-13T23:20:36Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > no worry about a lucky shot detonating your ammo magazine … but the fusion reactor instead? ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/34 "2006-05-15T06:45:15Z")
> [@Fish Cheer](#): > > … but the fusion reactor instead? But that can be buried deep in the ship, some ammo would invariably be stored at the firing point. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_Wright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@Steve\_Wright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_Wright)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/35 "2006-05-15T09:54:37Z")
Plasma weapons … hmm. SF critic and former weapons physicist David Langford mentioned charged particle beams … > [@](#): > > That reminds me that for particle beams in real life, the Earth’s own magnetic field is a big problem, since it makes them bend in a rather limp and Freudian way. In the 70s some weapons physicists hit on the idea of firing _uncharged_ particles which wouldn’t swerve in Earth’s field. Since neutral particles are bloody hard to accelerate, the cunning plan was to use protons and hire someone to attach electrons to them as they left the accelerator’s muzzle at close to the speed of light. The only other thing I remember about this wondrous scheme is its nickname, “Sipapu” - supposedly an old American Indian word meaning neutral hydrogen beam weapon. (This is from Langford’s convention talk “Fun With Senseless Violence”, reprinted in _The Silence of the Langford_. He discusses a wide range of SF weapons, and, incidentally, provides full instructions for building a lethal cold ray.) ---
**Author:** ![Reply](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/reply/32/15952_2.png) [@Reply](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reply)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/36 "2006-05-15T11:47:47Z")
Wouldn’t the ideal weapon depend on the circumstances involved and the kind of defenses likely to be in use? There doesn’t have to be one single uberweapon for all situations. But speaking of defenses, what are some conceivable ways of defending against laser weapons? Would mirrors provide any protection, or at least reflect/deflect enough of the beam to make the weapon a hazard for the shooter as well? I’m imagining a future battlefield where infantry carry handheld laser rifles and wear suits covered with miniprisms… a glancing beam gets diffused and reflected; nobody dies, but a dozen soldiers get permanently blinded, heh. On the other hand, I imagine lasers would be great for assassinations on unarmored/unshielded targets, no? If the beam is not in the visible frequency, the shooter would get an instant, invisible shot and leave no evidence 'cept a burning hole in the victim or a bloody mess. Would there be a smoke trail of any sort where the air got vaporized? Would there be a thunder-like sound? Imagine UAVs with good cameras and powerful laser weapons… they could hover around silently overhead, and the moment they identify a human target, it dies. Or, in the (further, hopefully) future, the gov could keep tabs on the whereabouts of every citizen and instantly de-citizenize any offender with a nice overhead laser blast from orbiting satellites – and the guy next to him won’t notice anything 'cept a strangely familiar charred smell. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/37 "2006-05-15T11:59:00Z")
What I’ve heard about anti-missle lasers is that they don’t work very well. Air isn’t completely transparent, and in particular moisture and pollution can suck energy out of the laser beam. On a ship, surrounded by constant ocean spray, a laser is pretty much useless. Even under ideal conditions (like in a desert) the “window” to destroy an incoming missle is very small. Much less than a minute. ---
**Author:** ![Reply](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/reply/32/15952_2.png) [@Reply](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reply)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/38 "2006-05-15T12:36:09Z")
Also, in regards to lasers, are there currently portable units powerful enough to blind people? If human eyes are sensitive enough, maybe the power requirement wouldn’t be so great? That’d be a very interesting incapacitation weapon… maybe for politically-driven attacks? Hmm. Press conferences and other political events could become dangerous if cameramen could bring modified laser-videocameras with them and attack the speaker’s eyesight. The camera would be the perfect disguise for a weapon – it could still work as a camera, only firing the laser when a hidden trigger is activated. They’d get a built-in viewfinder/scope, an excuse to aim directly at the target, an excuse to have a big power source (either a battery or a wall/van connection)… one bright flash of invisible light and the victim might never see again and the authorities may never find the one responsible cameraman out of 20 or 30. Blinding someone wouldn’t kill them, obviously, but it could do a lot to hurt their effectiveness and morale, to say the least. Or, hell, they could blackmail celebrities – who make a living by appearing on camera – with the threat of blindness unless they pay up before the next premiere/conference/party/whatever. Imagine a whole new kind of paparazzi. Scary. ---
**Author:** ![NoCoolUserName](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5fc32e/32.png) [@NoCoolUserName](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NoCoolUserName)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/39 "2006-05-15T15:11:50Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > …particle beam - fires streams of atoms or subatomic particles. Essentially it is a more powerful version of a cathode ray tube in a TV set… Let us not forget the “sun ray” dreamed up by E. E. Smith. Using a set of specially build “asteriods”–orbiting energy units–he channels the entire output of the sun into a particle beam. Great for repelling those attacking space fleets. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2006, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428/40 "2006-05-15T16:04:12Z")
In the Hymn Before Battle series they talk about projectile weapons that can accelerate ‘bullets’ to relativistic speeds (.5c). How would (or could) you accelerate a projectile to those kinds of speeds (I think they were using some kind of antimatter accelerant, or perhaps it was magnetic…don’t recall now)…and what would it do to the projectile if you did that in the atmosphere? -XT [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sci-fi-weapons/356428.md?page=3)