TFARCHIVE FORUMS

How would a Proton Missile work?
And
How would a photon Cannon work?

I was looking at a characters bio on tfu, and I’m not comfortable using weapons I don’t understand the effects of.

Proton missile? The only time I think I've heard of free protons is in the case of aqueous hydrogen ions (ie acid). I suppose it might be a missile that's filled with acid . . .

Photon cannon? If I remember correctly, a photon is a quantitative measure of light. Depending on the strength, it could be as ineffective as placing the beam of a flashlight on your arm, or as deadly as a laser . . .

Originally posted by RID Scourge
Proton missile? The only time I think I've heard of free protons is in the case of aqueous hydrogen ions (ie acid). I suppose it might be a missile that's filled with acid . . .

Actually, if I'm remembering my Star Wars pseudo-science correctly, 'proton' weapons are actually extremely low-yield proton-scattering nuclear warheads.

Photon cannon? If I remember correctly, a photon is a quantitative measure of light. Depending on the strength, it could be as ineffective as placing the beam of a flashlight on your arm, or as deadly as a laser . . .

More or less, yeah. The beam wouldn't necessarily be in the visable part of the spectrum, though...the device could be tuned to fire IR, UV, microwaves, radio waves, or all of the above at once.

Originally posted by Warcry

More or less, yeah. The beam wouldn't necessarily be in the visable part of the spectrum, though...the device could be tuned to fire IR, UV, microwaves, radio waves, or all of the above at once.

So, the weapon could only damage electronics and fry humans?

Originally posted by SoundCrush
So, the weapon could only damage electronics and fry humans?

Nah, infrared or ultraviolet light could blast through armour plating if the beam was intense enough.

Er...I think. I'm not really a physicist either.

In theory I would guess that any wavelength in the light spectrum can burn if made intense enough.

I for one would be willing to test this idea if given the proper tools

Photons? Ah, an opportunity...

Einstien won his Nobel prize for his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect (not his 1905 special relativity paper). The quanta of light is the photon (the electron and the proton are the quanta for charge). Light will however, show "smeared" wave-like properties if it's wavelength is large (frequency is low, frequency = 1/wavelength). The de Brogile quation:

momentum = h/wavelength
(h is Plank's constant)



Momentum is a property of particles. So, not only will low wavelength (and high energy according to: Energy = frequency*h) photons have "more" momentum, but any low momentum (slow and light: momentum = mass*velocity) particle will have a "longer" associated wavelength. A particle beam will diffract (like light) through an opening comparable to it's wavelength.



Discussion of the photoelectric effect (see the next page too):
http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/qu ... ctric.html
Photoelectric effect applet:
http://lectureonline.cl.msu.edu/~mmp/ka ... /photo.htm
Quantization of charge:
http://www.physchem.co.za/Static%20Elec ... llikan.htm



I don't think that all people would agree that Plank's 1900 paper introducing his constant was the begining of quantum mechanics (I've seen people calling this, the de Broigle equation, or the uncertainty principle to be that in my google search), but it is at least the earliest of the claims.

Plank was investigating the black-body radiation spectrum: an ideal black body is one that absorbs and radiates (if it's temperature is sufficienty high) all frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (light energy). This is from his 1920 Nobel Lecture:



For many years, [my aim] was to solve the problem of energy distribution in the normal spectrum of radiating heat. After Gustav Kirchhoff has shown that the state of the heat radiation which takes place in a cavity bounded by any emitting and absorbing material at uniform temperature is totally independent of the nature of the material, a universal function was demonstrated which was dependent only on temperature and wavelength, but not in any way on the properties of the material. The discovery of this remarkable function promised deeper insight into the connection between energy and temperature which is, in fact, the major problem in thermodynamics and so in all of molecular physics. ...

At that time I held what would be considered today naively charming and agreeable expectations, that the laws of classical electrodynamics would, if approached in a sufficiently general manner avoiding special hypotheses, allow us to understand the most significant part of the process we would expect, and so to achieve the desired aim. ...

[A number of different approaches] showed more and more clearly that an important connecting element or term, essential to completely grasp the basis of the problem, had to be missing. ...

I was busy... from the day I [established a new radiation formula], with the task of finding a real physical interpretation of the formula, and this problem led me automatically to consider the connection between entropy and probability, that is, Boltzmann's train of ideas; eventually after some weeks of the hardest work of my life, light entered the darkness, and a new inconceivable perspective opened up before me. ...

Because [a constant in the radiation law] represents the product of energy and time ... I described it as the elementary quantum of action. ... As long as it was looked on as infinitely small ... everything was fine; but in the general case, however, a gap opened wide somewhere or other, which became more striking the weaker and faster the vibrations considered. That all efforts to bridge the chasm foundered soon left little doubt. Either the quantum of action was a fictional quantity, then the whole deduction of the radiation law was essentially an illusion representing only an empty play on formulas of no significance, or the derivation of the radiation law was based on a sound physical conception. In this case the quantum of action must play a fundamental role in physics, and here was something completely new, never heard of before, which seemed to require us to basically revise all our physical thinking, built as this was, from the time of the establishment of the infinitesimal calculus by Leibniz and Newton, on accepting the continuity of all causative connections. Experiment decided it was the second alternative.



Black-body radiation applet:
http://webphysics.davidson.edu/alumni/M ... bb_mjl.htm





Protons? That reminds me about the hydrogen arc: apply enough voltage to Hydrogen mocules and you get Hydrogen atoms.


I haven't actually seen this somewhere, but it's analogous to heating steam in an open environment. Since matter prefers to space itself out when being forced to hold more energy (acording to Gibb's free principle: it tells of a balencing act between holding energy and occupying more space) H20 gas (steam) would like to double it's volume by turning into two gaseous molecules, H2 and O2 when heated in an open environment. Of course the heat has to be much higher than that at which the gases react to form steam. We can imagine that a stable H2 and O2 gas mixture at a very high temperature being suddenly brought to a moderatly high temperature would result in the temperature being raised somewhat due to the formation of H20 gas (greater stability lay in the matter releasing the chemical energy since the change in its spacial expanse was no longer as great as that at the extremely high temperature).



What's the analogy with the hydrogen arc? Give hydrogen molecules enough energy and they'd split into atoms (double the volume) or protons and electrons (even more, don't know how much according to Gibb's free energy). Of course, matter would gladly accept electrical energy (greater stability according to thermodynamics, and therefore, Gibb's free energy), even if it were to hold such energy without much expansion, i.e. the splitting of the molecules in the arc is an electrical phenomenon, but their reconversion into the molecules certainly isn't. It's analogous to that bit about H2 and O2 recombining.

The hydrogen arc (also flame):
http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/sci/A0851801.html

Right... These are all fantastic replys. excellent well done.

What, me felling fick becoz I didn't understand? Not a jot.

Why spend time theorizing when you can have the real thing?

Originally posted by Zisteau
Why spend time theorizing when you can have the real thing?

that was very awesome, i thank you sir

Originally posted by homerbot
that was very awesome, i thank you sir

You are welcome. It is my duty to spread love and joy everywhere through laser death rays.