Hard Light Productions Forums

General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: eliex on January 20, 2008, 05:21:41 pm

Title: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on January 20, 2008, 05:21:41 pm
 Okay . . . this is more of a civvy topic than anything.  :doubt:
So . . . nowadays, (2008) gems, gold, silver, metals are nearly the most expensive resources on earth.
 <as far as I know> Beams need gems:  Vasudans, topazes
                                                                Terrans, emeralds
                                                                 Shivans, rubies.

  When it really comes down to it . . . when the possibility that there aren't as many humans, vasudans whatever than there is on another terrestrial planet . . . when there are more resources than ever . . . when a system is independent of each other because all have all the equipment they need to survive . . . gas,metal,food . . .

  Where's the twist?
       
 
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on January 20, 2008, 05:25:43 pm

 Whoops sorry . . . when I initially wrote the first post I accidentally pressed "enter" so I didn't manage to finish off what I going to write,
so you must have posted during my "fixing" period.  :D
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Herra Tohtori on January 20, 2008, 05:25:45 pm
I dunno what the hell beams need to work but it's very likely they don't use solid state crystals to concentrate energy.

Even the current most powerful lasers are gas based, and even though FS2 beams are most certainly not lasers (but instead some kind of superheated, contained particle beams), the use of solid crystals is doubtful.

They are likely ruddy expensive regardless, though. But could you clarify the purpose of this topic a little? :nervous:
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on January 20, 2008, 05:27:55 pm
Sorry, I removed my post after I saw that there was more (I though that I had not read part of it)... still confusing though.

My original comment was:

Quote
:wtf: WTF?
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Retsof on January 20, 2008, 05:56:16 pm
I suspect that most Freespace weapons are magnetically focused.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on January 20, 2008, 07:43:05 pm

 Like Halo MAC cannons?
Except it's beams not bullet rounds?  :)
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on January 20, 2008, 08:09:34 pm
Some have theorized that Freespace beam weapons are plasma weapons held together by a magnetic field.  Plasma would dissipate it space otherwise.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Fearless Leader on January 21, 2008, 12:26:25 am
I dont see the beams having the same effect as plasma might, I think I remember my fighter getting knocked around a good deal, maybe they are some sort of particle accelerator??
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on January 21, 2008, 12:29:25 am
To be honest, I think we should give up on finding an explanation for beam cannons (or anything else for that matter) that fits with our understanding of physics.  It's just never going to happen.  The game was made for entertainment, not for accuracy of its physics.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: WMCoolmon on January 21, 2008, 12:45:24 am
Beam cannons are caused by creating a tear in subspace along a trajectory intersecting with the target ship. Plasma is then ejected from the blister into the tear. The area within this tear has less potential energy than the surrounding vacuum, causing the plasma to be channeled directly to the target vessel. In addition, the tear itself serves to degrade the hull, causing massive damage not possible with conventional weapons. Due to the inherent instability of shields within a subspace bubble, the tear also serves to cause beams to penetrate shields instantaneously.

The only problem is that use of such a weapon could possibly destroy the universe as we know it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_metastability_event#Vacuum_metastability_event) in the event of a malfunction, so their use would probably be highly restricted. But then again, maybe that's why ships aren't beam-free-alled by default. :p

(That is all made up on the spot and utterly non-canon)
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Fearless Leader on January 21, 2008, 12:56:22 am
Beam cannons are caused by creating a tear in subspace along a trajectory intersecting with the target ship. Plasma is then ejected from the blister into the tear. The area within this tear has less potential energy than the surrounding vacuum, causing the plasma to be channeled directly to the target vessel. In addition, the tear itself serves to degrade the hull, causing massive damage not possible with conventional weapons. Due to the inherent instability of shields within a subspace bubble, the tear also serves to cause beams to penetrate shields instantaneously.

The only problem is that use of such a weapon could possibly destroy the universe as we know it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_metastability_event#Vacuum_metastability_event) in the event of a malfunction, so their use would probably be highly restricted. But then again, maybe that's why ships aren't beam-free-alled by default. :p

(That is all made up on the spot and utterly non-canon)

 :wtf:


To be honest, I think we should give up on finding an explanation for beam cannons (or anything else for that matter) that fits with our understanding of physics.  It's just never going to happen.  The game was made for entertainment, not for accuracy of its physics.

 :ick:

I like the "its just magic" answer of blowfish, but Im going to merge it with the  "dont play with it or try to understand it because it will make you go blind" answer from WMCoolmon...

and now we have... 
Its just magic son, dont play with it or try to understand it because it will make you go blind, and every time you do before then God will kill a kitten.



Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on January 21, 2008, 12:59:07 am
The only problem is that use of such a weapon could possibly destroy the universe as we know it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_metastability_event#Vacuum_metastability_event) in the event of a malfunction

That's a high price to pay for a malfunction, but then again, if it happens, everyone will be too dead to care.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Davros on January 21, 2008, 09:19:41 am
well there isnt an unending supply of marmite and the shivans are quite partial to it...
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Retsof on January 21, 2008, 04:11:58 pm
What the heck is marmite?
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: jdjtcagle on January 21, 2008, 04:16:25 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmite

British Foodspread?
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Mika on January 21, 2008, 04:41:57 pm
Quote
I dunno what the hell beams need to work but it's very likely they don't use solid state crystals to concentrate energy.

Even the current most powerful lasers are gas based, and even though FS2 beams are most certainly not lasers (but instead some kind of superheated, contained particle beams), the use of solid crystals is doubtful.

They are likely ruddy expensive regardless, though. But could you clarify the purpose of this topic a little?

I think the most powerful lasers do not use gas, but are either Neodynium or Ytterbium based, or at least the power multiplying part is. The primary energy to start the population inversion is coming from Xenon flash sources. I'm guessing that the reason for this is related to the wavelengths of the powerful gas lasers, CO2 operates mostly at 10.6 µm and my gut says it takes a lot of effort to frequency double this to visible or ultraviolet wavelengths.

More interesting stuff about the current energy levels can be read from Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility

Please note the size of the facility, if you think it in terms of the FS ships, I think one could make it fit into a 1 km long ship, or even cruiser level ships but that would require some participation from the Finns at least. Unfortunately, due to the component warming, the pulse repetition rate is somewhat lacking at this point, but maybe in the future...

The beams in FS are not lasers for two reasons:

1. Laser is not focused

Of course one could say that it is a Gaussian beam travelling in space with the minimum of waist located in the end of the other ship and that location can be easily adjusted with large pieces of adaptive optics. Speaking of which, lets estimate the minimum spot size on the hull of the enemy ship just for the heck of it: assuming 2 m aperture in the beam turret, and a enemy ship 2 kms away, the resulting F/# would be - according to paraxial optics - 1000.

Now the Airy radius (diffraction limit) is r = 1.22*lambda*1000, where we estimate the wavelength of the equivalent laser beam to be around 550 nm (green light) yielding Airy radius of 670 µm. Below this one cannot go, so we see that quite a lot of irradiance is wasted if it was a laser beam. Here Gaussian optics nature is ignored, but because the spread angle is quite small, the result should give a good initial guess.

Working through the the Gaussian beam model with 670 µm spot at the minimum waist, resulting aperture diameter would be 2.4 m. Someone else could calculate the irradiance level on the ship and then reverse-engineer the required power from the ship's reactor. I suppose the result will be gigantic.

2. The whole beam is visible to the eye.
This one is not easily explained away with any scattering property, one ought to see bright flashes of dust particles exploding along the beam. And no, there are not so many dust particles in space to make the beam visible in the way it is depicted. On the other hand, it would be cool to see those tingling particles along the beam in space (rest of the beam cannot be seen) and a extremely bright focal point in the hull of the enemy ship. Feel like SCPing anyone?

Of course, the industrial level lasers that are used for cutting are most commonly CO2 based.

Yeah, of my hobbies I like martial arts best and Optics comes as a close second.

Mika
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on January 21, 2008, 04:51:59 pm
Beams aren't lasers, but lasers aren't lasers either.  Just give it up ... no one will ever find an explanation that satisfies everyone.  Freespace and physics just don't mix.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Mika on January 21, 2008, 05:03:47 pm
I didn't write that seriously. All the Physics stuff is correct, otherwise simply: I know FS and Physics don't mix. It doesn't stop me from using it as a thought-exercise.

Mika
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: WMCoolmon on January 21, 2008, 05:07:27 pm
Yeah, I think the stuff I've done on FS, coding, and HLP questions has helped me remember exact physics equations more than anything.

It's like America's Army, except instead of learning to save lives, you learn how to do physics. :p
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on January 21, 2008, 11:20:28 pm
Hahahaha . . .

 Okay, sorry for butting in, though I thought to get back to the topic . . .
Like Capella, < it is a system isn't it? >

  But . . . *I think* most systems HAVE got - gas planets ( fuel) 
                                                                      asteroid fields ( metals, rocks, etc )
                                                                     terristrial planets ( somewhere for humans/vasudans whatever to live in
                                                                       water ???  :confused:

 So . . . what's the best bit about having inter-system trade (if there is) or is it all about good relations, happy people, diplomacy.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Polpolion on January 24, 2008, 01:30:02 pm
Not all systems have the things you said.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: FreeSpaceFreak on January 24, 2008, 01:56:07 pm
And even IF all planets had all those things (which they don't), it would be far more interesting to build one big mine than 10 smaller mines. Hence, inter-system trade. And of course it's about good relations, happy people and diplomacy too. A good example would be the US. Some states are specialised in crops, others in industry, and so on and so forth. And apparently, that works fine.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Snail on January 24, 2008, 02:02:27 pm
I think that beams using crystals is utterly stupid. IMO.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: FreeSpaceFreak on January 24, 2008, 02:21:36 pm
Face it, everyone: we'll never know how exactly beam cannons work. The only clue we have is that they are "photon beam cannons". The "plasma core insertion" could be a temporary reactor core boost, as well.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Snail on January 24, 2008, 02:25:42 pm
The usage of emerald, topaz and rubies to create 'laz0rs' which are actually the 'b3am5' we see in FS2 is a very unsupported and "against common sense" statement to me.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on January 27, 2008, 06:21:38 pm
Okay . . . let's just say that times have changed since we first started as cavemen.  :nod:
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: S-99 on January 27, 2008, 07:56:12 pm
I dont see the beams having the same effect as plasma might, I think I remember my fighter getting knocked around a good deal, maybe they are some sort of particle accelerator??

Why couldn't a beam knock you around? If it's plasma based sure it could knock you around as gas is a form of matter. I mean plasma does have weight and mass, not to mention being subjected to the high speed a plasma beam goes from turret to target...you'll either be pieces or knocked around. This is if beams are plasma based (it seems logical that beams are plasma based). If beams aren't plasma based, then making a gigantic super laser wouldn't be very hard since most of the primary weapons for fighters are gas lasers. If you can make a tiny laser, why not make a honking huge ass laser? You certainly wouldn't need to steal tech from the shivans to build a huge laser when you already have diversified laser technology .

This is also my deduction that beams are not lasers.

On another note people need to be careful with the photons in particular. Photon beams cannons does not suggest that beams are lasers either. Fire emits photons, plasma emits photons, and lasers emit photons. The word photon around here at the hlpbb is used a little too strictly along side the word laser.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Polpolion on January 27, 2008, 08:13:15 pm
I think that beams using crystals is utterly stupid. IMO.

...QFT...
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Mura on January 29, 2008, 12:58:33 am
Quantum Field Theory or Quoted For Truth? :D

(This post can be count almost as spam and trolling since i had to make a quick websearch for the meaning of QFT and found these.... i would gladly read about quantum field theory and see if it has any relevance with this topic, but i am Forking sleepy and its almost 1 a.m. here  :nervous: )
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Woolie Wool on January 29, 2008, 05:07:14 pm
<as far as I know> Beams need gems:  Vasudans, topazes
                                                                Terrans, emeralds
                                                                 Shivans, rubies.

Do you read Star Wars novels? I can assure you that beam cannons are not lightsabers.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Snail on January 30, 2008, 01:21:20 pm
Even then Star Wars used non-conventional crystals anyway.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: AlphaOne on February 02, 2008, 07:28:31 am

The only problem is that use of such a weapon could possibly destroy the universe as we know it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_metastability_event#Vacuum_metastability_event) in the event of a malfunction, so their use would probably be highly restricted.




You know i swear to god some of these articles scare the fricking boxers out of me ! So dont let me see them when i'm at work or il get dragged to a lawsuit because of indecent exposure (basicly il make the other ladies around ehre cheat on theyr boyfriends/huisbands (dont believe me its just my braing gooing kaboom after the said article ) !

But then again wtf are these guis tring to study over there? Hell do they even understand 100% of the stuff that happenes there or are thy just asuming they know???


Also if beams work in any way as a particle accelerator they should be able to hit targets at masive distances not just 4 km. Also projecting  matter at a relativistic speed (im asuming relativistic speeds in the artivle means near the speed of light) would cause the said matter to acumulate infinite mass . By gaining infinite mass it would gain infinite gravity or something similar to a black hole of the sorts.

This is just something off the top of my devastetad brain whych a proffesor of mine (phisics of course
) tried to explain.

Also since im not 100% sure of his actual explanation this could be wrong. However i do remember very clear that i was arguing with him about the theory of relativity sayng basicly that it has to be wrong. Because if that were the case then light particles wich has been proven have mass should in theory becaome well sort of like a black hole or something. Or rather miniature black holes.


Some of them science geniuses here that got more then a 5 or 6 at math and phisics get here and smash my theory to pieces and post a correct one pls :D Thanx you guis are too kind :D
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Agent_Koopa on February 03, 2008, 05:45:17 pm
No, I think photons are massless.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Kazan on February 03, 2008, 09:32:15 pm
plasma is one of the four primary states of matter, it has mass - a stream of it striking your ship is going to cause a physical impact.

most of the weaponry in FS2 is probably modulated plasma - normally in pulses, beams being continuous streams.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Fearless Leader on February 04, 2008, 12:22:48 am
okokok, a ship could get knocked around by plasma, I was not thinking clearly... Im still not.


I think we can all agree that the weapons in FS2 are nothing we can comprehend, so Im going to say they are magic, therefore they could use gems to power them.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: blowfish on February 04, 2008, 12:33:06 am
okokok, a ship could get knocked around by plasma, I was not thinking clearly... Im still not.


I think we can all agree that the weapons in FS2 are nothing we can comprehend, so Im going to say they are magic, therefore they could use gems to power them.


They could, but it is unlikely that they acually do.

Oh and BTW, I don't think that gems can really "generate" power, do they?
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Kazan on February 04, 2008, 07:14:37 am
nope, gems are not a power source

they can be used to focus power, but they are not a power source
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Flipside on February 04, 2008, 07:31:51 am
And if it's plasma, they'd be useless, if it's photons, the size of a gem needed to focus a beam laser would be impossibly large, I would have thought, which would suggest man-made gems rather than natural ones.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: S-99 on February 04, 2008, 03:01:44 pm
I think we can all agree that the weapons in FS2 are nothing we can comprehend

This is a cheap cop out for a compromise.

Weapons in fs2 are quite comprehendable. They're not that complicated, it's all in the realm of lasers and plasma. That's not so complicated, and nor is flak cannons either. Understanding plasma as blob turrets makes sense. And by examining beams you know that they aren't just super lasers. A stream of plasma as opposed to bolts of plasma. Sure why not? It'd be like having standard guns and evolving eventually into a machine gun (single shot bullets getting upgraded to streams of bullets).

Plasma emits photons anyway, the name photon beam cannon was most likely used incorrectly, or perhaps it wasn't. Also beams not being lasers and being plasma based makes sense for their 4km range. To direct plasma you use magnetic fields. And as far as you can direct a magnetic field for a beam is probably how far it's going to go (4km in this case) before the beam starts to dissipate into a plume of non-concentrated plasma gas.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Fearless Leader on February 04, 2008, 11:37:33 pm
nope, gems are not a power source

they can be used to focus power, but they are not a power source

all Im trying to say is that IF the beams are in fact magic, then they could use gems to power them. Unless you can offer something to contradict that gems do not give off magical power or energies
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Flipside on February 04, 2008, 11:51:19 pm
'Stay out of the way of Merf's Magic Missile and you won't get hit!'
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: eliex on February 05, 2008, 12:07:34 am
 
Quote
Quote
from eliex <as far as I know> Beams need gems:  Vasudans, topazes
                                                                Terrans, emeralds
                                                                 Shivans, rubies.
Woolie Wool
Do you read Star Wars novels? I can assure you that beam cannons are not lightsabers.

 Do you seriously think I don't know that?  I will have to be REALLY stupid not to know that.
O.K, looks like . . . no one agrees with me . . . fine . . . but can people do us a favour and not write comments like " Oh! A beam cannon is not a lightsaber!! "
 
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Aardwolf on February 05, 2008, 12:48:03 am
Well, it doesn't help that you said "as far as I know" in your post... that sort of indicates you not only believe but know for a fact that the thing you are about to state is true, or at least are pretty certain of it... What it doesn't sound like is that you are stating a hypothesis, which in this case is at best false.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: WMCoolmon on February 05, 2008, 02:21:46 am
Er, I don't read it as any such thing. I read it as "all evidence available points to this conclusion".

I actually read that as being indicative of some level of uncertainty, and that there's further tests/information that could be gained, or else it would be "As far as can be known" or something similar.

A hypothesis is basically someone saying "As far as we know, gravity is caused by mass" and not making wild unsupported guesses "The chicken came before the egg".

But at any rate, I'm inclined to agree that it's false, since I don't remember anything about crystals in the FS universe. Nor do I remember anything that even suggested that crystals are used for any kind of weaponry whatsoever.
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: S-99 on February 05, 2008, 02:25:45 am
Crystals are too a power source. (http://www.crystalsbay.net/)!!!!!
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: WMCoolmon on February 05, 2008, 02:29:27 am
Are you serious?

There are dozens of websites like this on the internet. Hundreds, probably.

But oh well. Magical beams with new age healing crystals does sound pretty interesting. :p
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Flipside on February 05, 2008, 09:02:14 am
'Welcome to the Age of Sagittarius, Mother****er....'

Sorry.....
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: Charismatic on February 06, 2008, 05:11:12 pm
Was somebody smoking when they posted this?
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: karajorma on February 10, 2008, 05:24:44 am
plasma is one of the four primary states of matter

I've always hated that claim that there were 4 primary states. I've never understood how they managed to expand from the classic 3 by including plasma but still ignore liquid crystals. I find it an odd state of affairs to say that the state that stops every life form on Earth collapsing into a big puddle doesn't count as a primary state of matter. :D
Title: Re: Planetary Discovery Deteroiation
Post by: S-99 on February 11, 2008, 03:06:28 am
Are you serious?

There are dozens of websites like this on the internet. Hundreds, probably.

But oh well. Magical beams with new age healing crystals does sound pretty interesting. :p

Get in the way of new age healing crystal beams and you will feel better pilot!'