Spacescifi

Sad thing is Star Wars actually did this lol. During the battle of Endor the Death Star must have throttled down it's shot power a bit, since it was shown one-shotting rebel capitol ships during the fleet battle while Imperial allied ships were nearby fighting them.

Against space stations with limited manuverability you really can just overwhelm them with missiles. Against a moving spaceship it's a different story though. Especially if spaceships use high efficiency torchdrives as seen in The Expanse. Honestly common lasers make a much bigger difference if you have low efficiency drives like chemical rockets... since you cannot dodge much and lasers have all the time in the world to cook you. However what if The Expanse actually used the infamous Ravening Beam Of Death from Winchell Chung's Atomic Rockets site? How would the show change then? People often try to say the reason The Expanse did not use laser weapons was because they were impractical or require too much power. But a RBOD only needs 10 MW, and we already know Epstein drives put out way more MW than that. Here is a refresher on the infamous Ravening Beam Of Death (RBOD) from Atomic Rockets web site: The ever useful Atomic Rockets site has a great section on laser weaponry, but the conclusion is far different than what you seem to be implying. Rather than have a multitude of laser weapons or optical systems, the ultimate aim is to create a Ravening Beam of Death (RBoD) and attack targets from as great a distance as possible. For practical reasons, this turns out to be one light second (just under the distance from the Earth to the Moon), since you can see the target, aim and make corrections in such a short time frame that the target cannot move an appreciable distance. The massive Free Electron Laser (or actually Xaser, since it is fired in the x-ray frequencies) near the end of the section can vaporize metal, ceramic and carbon in milliseconds at that range, and if you are on an unpowered orbit or on an asteroid, the beam is still lethal at a light minute and dangerous even a light hour away. Let's take a 10 MW ERC pumped FEL at just above the lead K-edge. This particular wavelength is used because lead is pretty much the heaviest non-radioactive element you can get, and at just above the highest core level absorption for a material you can get total external reflection at grazing angles - so no absorption or heating of a lead grazing incidence mirror. We will use a 1 meter diameter mirror. The Pb K-edge x-ray transition radiates at 1.4E-11 m. This gives us a divergence angle of 1.4E-11 radians. At 1 light second, we get a spot size of 5 mm, and an intensity of 5E11 W/m2. Looking at the NIST table of x-ray attenuation coefficients, and noting that 1.4E-11 m is a 88 keV photon, we find an attenuation coefficient of about 0.5 cm2/g for iron (we'll use this for steel), 0.15 cm2/g for graphite (we'll use this for high tech carbon materials) and 0.18 cm2/g for borosilicate glass (a very rough approximation for ceramics). Since graphite has a density of 1.7 g/cm3, we get a 1/e falloff distance (attenuation length) of 4 cm. Iron, with a density of 7.9 g/cm3, has an attenuation length of 0.25 cm. Glass, density 2.2 g/cm3, has an attenuation length of 2.5 cm. At 1 light second, therefore, the beam is depositing 2E12 W/cm3 in iron at the surface and 7E11 W/cm3 at 0.25 cm depth; 1.2E11 W/cm3 in graphite at the surface and 5E10 W/cm3 at 4 cm depth; and 2E11 W/cm3 in glass at the surface and 7E10 W/cm3 at 2.5 cm depth. Using 6E4 J/cm3 to vaporize iron initially at 300 K, we find that iron flashes to vapor within a microsecond to a depth of 0.9 cm. The glass, assumed to take 4.5E4 J/cm3 to vaporize (roughly appropriate for quartz) will flash to vapor within a microsecond to a depth of 4 cm within a microsecond. Graphite, at 1E5 J/cm3 for vaporization, will flash to vapor to a depth of 0.7 cm within a microsecond (the laser performs better if we let it dwell on graphite for a bit longer, we get a vaporization depth of 10 cm after ten microseconds). Net conclusion - ravening death beam at one light second. Now lets look at one light minute. The beam is now 30 cm across. This is much deeper than the attenuation length in all cases, so we will just find the radiant intensity and the equilibrium black body temperature of that intensity. We have an area of 7E-2 m2, and an intensity of 1.4E8 W/m2. You need to reach 7000 K before the irradiated surface is radiating as much energy away as heat as it is receiving as coherent x-rays. The boiling point of iron is 3023 K, the boiling point of quartz is 2503 K, and the sublimation temperature of graphite is 3640 K. All of these will be vaporized long before they stop gaining heat. At this range, the iron is subject to 5.6E8 W/cm3 at the surface, the graphite to 3.3E7 W/cm3 at the surface, and the glass to 5.6E7 W/cm3 at the surface. Using the above values for energy of vaporization, we get about 0.1 milliseconds before the iron starts to vaporize, 0.8 milliseconds before the glass starts to vaporize, and 3 milliseconds before the graphite begins to vaporize (because of its long attenuation length, once it begins to sublimate, graphite sublimates rapidly to a deep depth, while you essentially have to remove the iron layer by layer). Net conclusion - still a ravening death beam at one light minute. What about at one light hour? The beam is 18 meters across. The equilibrium black body temperature is 900 K. This is well below the melting point of most structural materials. Ten megawatts, however, is a lot of ionizing radiation. Any unhardened vehicle will be radiation killed at these ranges. Obviously, the ideas of "close, medium and far" ranges have very different meanings in a space war context. The only way to effectively deal with a weapon like that is to have several weapons of similar power in your constellation, or be prepared to fill the sky with tens of thousands of kinetic kill vehicles (referred to in Rocketpunk Manifesto as Soda Cans of Death or SCoDs). With an overwhelming number of targets, the individual laser will eventually not be able to track and kill every target, and of course other factors like the service cycle (how often you might have to stop and cool down the system), or the speed the laser mirror can swivel to track incoming targets reduces the absolute number of targets you can service even with a RBoD. Main Questions: What would The Expanse be like if it used RBOD laser cannons? Would it change the show so much it would be unrecognizable lol?

No.

According to google AI: The average head circumference of a newborn is around 13 3/4 inches (35 cm), while the average length at birth is 19 to 20 inches (about 50 cm), with a normal range of 18 to 22 inches (45.7 to 60 cm). Here's a more detailed breakdown: Head Circumference: The average newborn's head measures around 13 3/4 inches (35 cm). Length: The average length at birth for a full-term baby is 19 to 20 inches (about 50 cm), with a normal range of 18 to 22 inches (45.7 to 60 cm). Head Growth: The bones in a baby's skull are still growing together, and the skull is growing faster during the first four months than at any other time in her life. Fetal Macrosomia: The term "fetal macrosomia" is used to describe a newborn who's much larger than average, weighing more than 8 pounds, 13 ounces (4,000 grams). Birth Weight: Full-term babies typically weigh between 5 pounds 11 1/2 ounces and 8 pounds, 5 3/4 ounces at birth. My analysis: If the leather egg is thin then you may not need wider hips. It would have to be stronger against tearing on the outside than inside obviously. Otherwise perhaps the alien women would need wider hips than normal human women, is that what you are saying? I suppose another way to do it without wider hips would be if the alien bones were more flexible than human ones. Being able to bend or expand more without breaking before returning to normal shape.

Scenario: So we have your standard palette swapped humanoid scifi race (which looks all but human in name only like in Star Trek) but they lay eggs instead of live birth like humans. Once the baby leaves the egg it will still be dependant on the mother for breast feeding etc until it grows strong enough. Main Questions: 1. Would or should pregnancy take longer or the same (9 months give or take)? 2. How long would gestation take? How long should it take ideally for a healthy baby as the egg incubates? 3. For the sake of argument the shell is thin and leathery to the touch, meaning it won't crack so much as tear. Which is exactly how babies exit out of them, by tearing their way out when ready. Your thoughts?

Basically Star Trek level medical then. Which is paradoxical because either Picard is proud of his shiny bald head or they still have not cured male baldness.

Depends on how good medical technology is I suppose. Since unlike machines biological systems can heal (up to a point anyway). Not saying they will ever be the same, but there just may be a way to slow the process or negate the ill effects enough that they can live years later on even if not a full lifespan.

Certainly seems easier judging by how many times Starship has blown up... not to say he won't succeed. Just that we have skylab and the ISS as proof that we can do orbital assembly.

Another way to put it is this. If you do not want to waste money you need reusable rocketry. And if you want to colonize anywhere beyond earth you need reusable lest you waste money and resources you cannot even get back.

Yes... if they reinvented their own starship. How else will you get back? You need reusable launch vehicles... which is what Starship is designed for.

Really to the masses they are one and the same. Many times people don't know the difference. Educated in science/space physics thoroughly are the minority... because ST and SW don't teach it. Your mileage on all of that is better watching shows like The Expanse. Which I say looking forward to future scifi series that have not been made but will be similar to The Expanse.

Scifi seldom cares about the fact that the devils of physics are in the details. Everytime I watch folks in Star Trek or Star Wars stand outside a window looking into space from their spaceship I cringe a bit inside. Knowing glass, even with lead or gold film added won't stop all radiative damage from flowing past the glass. I honestly think if you wanted glass you could still see through to stop the radioactive soup of cosmic space, which includes cosmic rays (relativistic subatomic particles), you would have to rely on an actively powered system as opposed to a standard passive one. Such as this: Active Radiation Shield (ARS) window: Glass would have a middle pocket filled with a dense gas like xenon that circulates and is cleaned out of the particle rays it catches. A strong magnetic field would be configured to catch cosmic rays so they do not penetrate through to the base layer of glass, which passengers stand behind. Instead the dense gas would scatter them and the magnetic fields would catch the relativiatic particles which would be cleaned out the system some how. A complex system? Sure. Which is why unlike Star Trek and Star Wars windows on spaceships will be few lol. Unless you just don't have max radiation protection so you don't care, which is reality lol. I mean really, all those windows are going to do is get you blinded by the unfiltered light of the sun anyway, which is why on the ISS they have sunshade panels to cover the windows because the sun is harsher to look at in space than it is here on Earth.

Thanks will watch but have not yet Armoured targets would be protected from lower powered masers. But at the point where you have a scifi melt steel laser the wavelength matters less... except for power perhaps? Meaning a steel melting gamma laser would be more of a power hog than just using a UV or infrared laser? Is that correct? On another note, I am not sure we have the power to minaturize them, but if we could arm small drones with anti-drone masers then that would be perfect for drone defense.

Interesting, so my army using masers would likely get wrecked if they faced off against yours with the I-lasers huh? Since yours would deliver more heat to the target faster?

Scenario: A scifi directed energy cannon is made for use on the battlefield. Just small enough to fit inside the bed of a truck. Powerful enough to cut through an inch of steel every half second of sustained beaming. Main Question: Choose your wavelength for maximum effectiveness on the battlefield. You may choose radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, X-rays, or gamma rays. My pick: Microwaves. Good penetration and heating. Versus Scenario: Assuming I had an armed ground force with twenty microwave cannons each as powerful as the OP (burns through an inch of steel every half second), would they have any advantage or disadvantage against an enemy force armed with directed energy cannons of the same power but using a wavelength other than microwaves?

Machine Artificiqlly Constructed Planet: Think like the Deathstar from Star Wars, only it is run by an an advanced AI. Theoretically there is nothing in physics that says you cannot do this. However if you wanted a more human thinking intelligence you would likely have to go full transhumanism and start making cyborgs (with brains linked to the planet AI to feed it's intellgence to help it run the machine planet). Flesh and blood planet: Impossible or actually impossible? Living things need to breath no? Wait. Come to think of it, a flesh and blood planet covered by a watery ocean MIGHT be possible to survive, since there would be a breathable atmosphere above it, and the living planet could breath under water like fish do. Sea creatures could provide it with food provided it did not need to eat too often given it's size. Like any organism the planet would grow over time until it reaches it's adult phase where growth stops (earth size). I do wonder about the large amounts of CO2 a living planet would be venting into the oceqn and what effect that would have on the atmosphere l. I still think an ocean covered planet of flesh with a breathable atmosphere is easier to exist from a physics standpoint than a planet of flesh not covered by an ocean. Simply because an ocean provides both protection and easy access to fish for food. And before anyone asks how such life could possibly evolve, it would seem more likely that it was designed that way by other intelligent beings. Since the energy alone to even make it would be insane. Especially from a cell division point of view. My guess is whoever made the planet figured out a way to do nonstop cell division growth without it mutating and killing the organism. So it took it to it to it's max potential and made it into a planet. Somehow importing an ocean and an atmosphere to cover the planet of flesh to complete it. Thoughts on this?

Evem if they somehow manage to board the ship they are still screwed if the ship has anti-personnel electric liquid spewing defense systems installed on all along the deck. Yet I think were this technology REALLY shines is it's ability to stun an entire group without killing them. Which could allow you to safely board the pirate vessel and take them as prisoners.

I am aware of it. But did they ever share if the plasma rings were fired out horizontally or standing vertically like zeros? Hard to know how to visualize it, but if I had to guess I would assume horizontal.

Also still better than plasma weaponry for effectiveness lol. Also not a gun... so cool and unique. Like the electric version of a flamethrower, without the flame and a possibility of not being lethal. I could see guys with backpack tanks and spray guns firing this, but it would only last seconds before running out.

Especially inside buildings for security. Have people or robbers going inside trying to steal something? It's going to more difficult knowing they are either are going to have to use someone else who is authorized or wear a metal suit to enter unauthorized areas.

I saw a youtube video where a guy and his buddies made a contest for creative ways to shoot down small drones. One of them had a bucket of a salty liquid solution that conducts electricity, which was rigged to a water spraying machine that could shoot high. Electricity was conducted from the machine and not long after the water hit the drone it fell from the sky. Anyway it dawned on me that such liquid/electronically conductive technology has niche defense applications. It would be quite practical for property defense... so long all you are facing is guys with guns. You could hid away multiple high powered liquid spewing cannons and the moment gunmen approach unleash torrents of electrically conducted liquid solution at them. Granted I know guys could wear a metal suit to protect them, but chances are high... especially in an urban setting, that they would not be prepared for this anyway. Besides the fact that liquid splashes everywhere and unless you are totally convered up (including your face) you're getting shocked. Militarily it is not as useful since air forces would just strike it from a safe distance. But against infantry without protection from electrical shock it could be quite effective albeit at shorter range than guns. The other reason it's impractical is that liquid is not compact and requires a lot of storage, something you don't want to mess with on the battlefield. But for static defense of property, provided there is no air support to take out the liquid cannons they could be effective. Come to think of it... it would be perfect for stopping the Somali pirates in speedboats. It's one thing to get hit by water cannons, but quite another when it's shooting a special solution that is designed to conduct electricity to shock you. Seagoing ships have room for such technology and could be adapted to make use of it. Whether it is lethal or not just depends on how much electricity you're conducting I guess. So assuming one wanted to stun a bunch of assailants at once Star Trek style you could actually do it. Just not with phasers but with electrically conductive liquid autocannons. Thoughts?

The issue with railguns is that they degrade from friction. Would it be possible to use plasma to propel a projectile at railgun velocities instead? Cooling we can do easily.. especially with a navy ship in the ocean. Spare no expense for power. . I don't care if you have to rig up a NSWR and rig it to power the plasma railgun. We already know nukes can propel stuff, so should it not be possible to rig plasma in a way to propel a projectile at railgun velocities? Secondary: With railguns the friction wears them out, but with a plasma railgun, hopefully friction woukd not be a factor. Only cooling it. Which we can do.

Haha... I can see it now, fighter jets dogfighting with lasers intentionally dumping large clouds of black smoke that take a while to break up... long enough to dump several and use it as a kind of shield to hide behind on occasion.

Wait... assuming lasers today could 1 shot missiles easily (rather than beam constantly for several seconds), would they even have the range of modern artillery or anti-aircraft guns? I say this because laser beams spread/lose focus/strength with enough distance, which means they also become ineffective at such a range. Meanwhile an artillery shell is lethal no matter where it bursts or lands. Like what is even the practical combat range for lasers in atmosphere? I guess it depends on the laser lens diameter. Let's give a laser lens diameter/bore of one meter for example. This reddit post has some interesting points, which hint that lasers although cool, may not even have as good as range as regular guns befors they begin to lose focus and spread out. Like 60 meters (180 feet) is a definite kill zone but past that you will start to lose beam focus/penetration and start to just burn targets. For a pistol size laser bore anyway. Meanwhile there are sniper rifles that can hit targets miles away lol. I guess kinetics are usually superior except in niche situations.

A valid point... when the real answer is for scifi is that air battles look cool lol.