Light sabers

Ok to clear this up. Im talking about using an energy beam to cut through things not a laser beam it would keep on going. Something hand held.

Why doesnt someone tell me what a light sabre could actually be used for?

C'mon, it'll make carving the Turkey SO much easier!

Ok, I was thinking about this...and I might have a fairly feasible solution...

First, you'd have your hilt (housing the power source, and ionizing device). Then a trigger activated, telescoping rod (similar to ASP defense batons) that would spring out. The rod could be made to then turn the air around it to the plasma state.... You'd have a bit of a "trail" effect when swinging it around, but in essence, it would look like, and behave similar to, a light saber...as well as have the solidity factor. I don't think we're that far away from being able to do this. However, the practicality is still a factor, but hey....I'd want one....

Ah an interesting idea gazrok, would not there be massive amounts of radiated heat and light though?

hi this may seem stupid but if were talking about jedi lightsabers the crystals that are used are special force-sensitive crystals and the beam isn't really light, its force energy. BTW light doesn't deflect should it interact with another beam of light. Plasma sabers would work better but(the magnetic fields generated by the plasma would repulse each other)
the amount of fuel and energy needed would be prohibitive as well as the temperature generated by the plasma would kinda singe your jedi robe.

***SPOILER***

I haven't read the thread.

Originally posted by TBLSLAANESH
Has anyone asked this before?

Nope, you're the first!

(had to)

Although, Gazrok's idea above is probably the best path, after reading a few.

[edit on 3/27/2005 by Amorymeltzer]

I don't think it's possible to make such a device with the science that we have today...

But you could someday be possible make a device to "cut" like a lightsaber with gold wire pulled as thinly as possible and holding the wire with an inertial dampening field. This is also sci-fi (borrowed from Ringworld by LARRY NIVEN), but it sounds a little more feasible than a solid light beam powered by the Schwartz.

Originally posted by Seth76
But you could someday be possible make a device to "cut" like a lightsaber with gold wire pulled as thinly as possible and holding the wire with an inertial dampening field. This is also sci-fi (borrowed from Ringworld by LARRY NIVEN), but it sounds a little more feasible than a solid light beam powered by the Schwartz.

Inertial dampeners? Right... Ignoring the fact that we don't have em to begin with, the amount of mass they take is absurd. Really absurd. Although you get props for Space Balls.

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Ignoring the fact that we don't have em to begin with, the amount of mass they take is absurd. Really absurd. Although you get props for Space Balls.

I never said we had them, and I did say this was sci-fi. If we don't have them, how do you know an inertial dampener would take a lot of mass? Did I miss something at the last star trek convention?



I can't believe no one had hit on the spaceballs props!

Originally posted by Seth76
I never said we had them, and I did say this was sci-fi. If we don't have them, how do you know an inertial dampener would take a lot of mass? Did I miss something at the last star trek convention?

Inertial dampener reduces the effect of the forces of acceleration to light speed, etc. In order to do that you create a huge mass behind you.

For the record, I was just at a physics lecture on Star Trek (in honor of Einstein's birthday). We discussed dampeners, among other things.

Okay. Now. Take an automated industrial laser cutting tool that you can find on production lines from GM to ship builders etc...program it to put out power to a sword length and design the power source into a usable sword "handle". Normally these machines are enormous. Creating the technology package for a light saber although unatainable by most exists. For safety reasons I hope its never made. More people would accidentaly cut their own heads off than you could count.

Many more things involved than just emitting a laser thank you. How bout a gas emitted from the handle that has a conductive effect making the beam run in one continuous circuit? A laser is the easiest way to obtain that much destructive cutting power with the fewest parts. How about a super grounding system that forces the beam to be shaped? I know. A micro gamma reactor ala Popular Mechanics? Make it fit into the handle which is actually feasible the gamma reactor is only a few parts total, less than ten I believe, and stunningly powerful. Program it to put out a finely focused gamma ray backlit by a powerful light beam so the user can "see" the gamma beam! Thats it dammit!

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Inertial dampener reduces the effect of the forces of acceleration to light speed, etc. In order to do that you create a huge mass behind you.

For the record, I was just at a physics lecture on Star Trek (in honor of Einstein's birthday). We discussed dampeners, among other things.

Einstein's birthday, a likely excuse you trekie! I knew it!
Its ok, I'm getting over the fact that my DVR isn't recording Enterprise because of some silly foul up with the TV schedule.

Ok, how about a field that would increase the wire's density to near infinity while not affecting its outward mass. I can't remember the exact way that it was described in the book, I read the book in elementary school 15+ years ago (very good book, going onto my must read list.) I think you got the general concept of it?

So...what color would the light saber be? Red..?....Yellow?

And wouldn't the heat generated from the saber burn your face and wrist a tad bit?

Originally posted by Gazrock
That's a lot of tech, foe something that is basically useless....Melee weapons pretty much went out of practical use with the invention of the gun....

Basically useless? Are you kidding? A laser sword with a similar cutting power to a Jedi light sabre would be anything but useless! If DARPA and like organizations thought it was a feesible goal they would be trying to create one. It would be a standard issue for Special Forces, right along side the nano-exoskeleton. Of course, that might change once enough Jedi cut off their own limbs with it.

Being both a military soldier and a competitive martial artist who has been to various places around the world I can tell you melee weapons are still in practical use. The invention of the Gun has not rendered melee weapons useless. Not even for a military soldier. Granted in modern warfare ideally your instrument of death is a gun, but sometimes a melee weapons is optimal or your only choice. Here is a few factors you should consider when determining the practicality of melee weapons:

They are covert

Typically lighter then a gun/rifle

Does not require ammunition

As a civilian a melee weapon may be more readily available

More likely to encounter a melee weapon in many parts of the world

As a civilian the judge might actually believe you killed the thug with your large maglite out of "self-defense" versus using your Kimber 1911.

Training with melee weapons allows you to develop the kind of technique and body mechanics that can very easily transfer over to unarmed combat.

So basically if you're non-military a melee weapon (stick, cane, maglite...doesn't have to be a knife) is still very practical.

As a soldier your goal is to win in combat. Usually that means you will pick a gun over a knife, but not always. A warrior needs to be dynamically prepared for combat, so bringing your SOG or KABAR for those "just in case" scenarios is just as important as bringing your gun. It's kinda like a hardcore backpacker not bringing an extra pair of socks because he is wearing "waterproof" boots...he still brings an extra pair "just in case".

Also, consider this: The tides may suddenly turn on earth and throw us into a post-apocalyptic world. It might be natural disasters or maybe weapons of mass destructions that cause it, doesnt really matter. The important thing is the potential effect it would have on the world's economy and its ability to supply you ammunition

Originally posted by Seapeople
Why doesnt someone tell me what a light sabre could actually be used for? Then once we get that determined we can discuss why making one will never happen

Good thing you didn't ask anyone to show you what it could be used for

A light sabre, in theory, would be a deadly weapon, period. Therefore if it can be invented it will be invented, and it will be used.

I dont think its possible to build a light saber like in Star Wars. For the simple fact that the light beam just stops after a set distance in mid air. There is nothing their to reflect the beam or anything in mid air it just cuts out to make a nice sword. Light really tends not to do that.

It might be possible to build something that has the same effect in cutting as a light saber but works on a different principle other then a light beam. Think of a sword made more like a super hot cutting torch with a three foot flame. This is a concept that has been used in such shows as Gundam. A ''plasma sword'' if you will could be focused and have its length adjusted by controling the release of its fuel.

If you could make it hot enough I think it would have the same cutting effect as a light saber. But this would not address the solid state light sabers seem to have. So two torch swords wouldnt clash like light sabers do.



BTW these really reminds me of a show called Venture Brothers one of the guys made a lightsaber but couldnt sell it at all. He said " The army told him they dont sword fight anymore" and he said ''Matel wasnt interested in a toy that cost two million in parts alone''.

[edit on 28-3-2005 by ShadowXIX]

[edit on 28-3-2005 by ShadowXIX]

Solid light beam??? It's not really solid... I think the principle would be that the particles making the light beam would be so concentrated and so hot that they would seem solid when hitting any other concentrated light particles, but would cut through anything else just as in butter.

I think they'll invent that someday... but the thig is that in the Star Wars fantasy universe, there are no guns that shoot bullets just as in pur world... only goofy blasters shooting light beams. I really don't think a real-life Jedi of sorts could handle a guy emptying his AK-47 charger directly at him, just by blocking the bullets with the saber!

We'd need to develop further mental powers (like blocking or stopping bullets) for such kind of weapon to be useful to anything. But they'd still be extremely cool, though!

As far as making light that terminates at a given distance, this is not a "hard" problem. One simply needs to have enough lasers of different wavelengths to have the proper interference pattern. A true step function, which is the case here (amplitude of "1" out to a certain length and then 0 thereafter), might require too many lasers to be practical for carrying around with one hand, but getting a light beam that has that form isn't impossible by any means.

According to astrophysicist Yakov Borisovich Zel'dovich, a rapidly spinning conductor will cause the creation of virtual particle radiation at its surface. Particle production is controlled by the charge, angular velocity (of rotation) and radius of this charged conductor.

If we imagine a rod shaped charged field of atomic-scale cross-section, which is superconducting and rotating at near-lightspeed, then charge regulation becomes the control for the particle emission type and quantity. Such charged fields would tend to repel one-another (if they are of like polarity), which means the blades would BLOCK one another. NOTE: a sabre would have to be built carefully and tuned correctly! A badly adjusted sabre would subject its user (and everyone in range) with considerable amounts of gamma radiation!.

The glow of the sabre blade consists of virtual-photons energised by the rotating field into real photons ... virtual light make real! The opaque 'thumb-thick' blade shape may be a swirl of ionised atmospheric particles (the AIR) drawn in and swirling about the core. When you IONISE a gas, you actually have a PLASMA (as it is meant by terrestrial physics) ... and this would glow JUST LIKE A FLUORESCENT TUBE (which is ALSO a plasma!) ... BUT this thumb-thick plasma zone is merely a by-product ... the REAL cutting is performed by minuscule core of the true blade ... leaving almost microscopically thin cuts. (The blade would STILL glow fiercely in even in a vacuum, as it throws off 'virtual photons - made real' ... but the thumb-thick core may not be visible.)

Such a tight rapidly spinning charged superconducting field would rend (tear) through most matter by stripping off electrons which bind atoms together. The ionized matter about the 'cut', as well as field-excited atomic movement in the localized area of the 'cut', would mimic great point-of-contact heat. A wound to a soft-tissue organic being would appear to be a microscopically thin BURN - and such a wound would usually tend to be cauterized (depending on how slowly the blade passed through - a large blood vessel cut too quickly may not be sufficiently 'burned' to cauterize). Dense metals which have loosely bound electrons (which are free to wander about their lattice structure) would be more resistant to cutting. The 'atom stripping' effect would take a little longer to cut through, because such materials have more electrons 'to spare' before their lattice structure becomes 'torn'.

Metals are also more highly conductive, and the localized 'heat' effects are minimized because the heat is carried away and dispersed through the material more quickly. This means that even though with varying amounts of effort, a lightsabre could cut through virtually anything, some materials would offer more resistance to a sabre blade, and therefore we can now understand how Lord Vader's armour was able to ward off most of Luke's glancing blow, saving his life. Mr Albert Forge has gone further, and has postulated a mechanism for the generation of the spinning field which creates the blade described above. Imagine a tiny sphere of unknown composition (perhaps some of the 'hypermatter' referred to in the SWICS & SWVD books by LFL's Dr Reynolds). Rapidly spin this into a disk by the effect of inducing fields (probably EM). The disk deformed and elongated into a tube, or rod (imagine the sleeve of a shirt being turned inside out) by an axially mounted and powerful electron gun (like the tube of your TV).

Field extension/retraction would be controlled by altering the output of the electron gun (which incidentally also controlled the charge of the conducting field ... the spin rate is determined by the inducing EM fields that created the disk from the sphere in the first place). 'Focussing' in this case may then be the very-rapid application of 'tuning' precession forces upon the extended field in order to 'follow' the orientation of the hilt, as left to itself it would tend to gyroscopically resist orientation changes. [NOTE: Mr Forge would like to say that all the above, which having its roots in 'real' physics, is speculative, and must be taken with "several solar masses of sodium chloride" *grin* ... IMHO however, it is a VASTLY more consistent and believable model than any other. It just 'could' possibly work! *AND* it matches ALL the observed and ascribed conditions!]

ADVANTAGES
it SPINS - matching my 'gyroscopic angular inertia' ideas (independently supported by the SWVD)
no 'plasma' or 'fuel' required other than raw power
the blade is PURE energy
the blade is opaque
there is a sensible 'focussing' (tuning) role for crystals which COULD see them able to adjust the colour!
the blades would block one another AND blaster bolts!
it hums it glows, even in a vacuum!
the cuts are microscopically thin it cuts by 'shearing away' the electrons in the substance, leaving a locally 'induced' heat-like reaction in other words: .. leaving burns & cauterized wounds! dense metallic surfaces with many stray electrons in their matrix would provide higher resistance to the 'electron stripping' cutting action ... thus Vader's armour stops the glancing blow from killing him!

Mr Forge has built upon the 'sabre/blaster relationship' idea (presented in Model Three above) using his 'virtual-light' model ... A question from Mr Doran Skalak about gravitic effects prompted me to ask an astrophysicist (Curtis Saxton) questions about high-speed rotations and relativistic effects: the following comments are my own attempts to explain what he told me, and I may have made any number of scientific errors ... In Model#6 there is a 'virtual' object ROTATING at the core of the blade .. a forcefield of almost zero mass (I assume) which has a NON-MECAHNICAL induced spin applied at near lightspeed [c] to achieve the Zeldovich effect as described above.

Apparently, objects moving at near 'c' WILL undergo the mass-effects predicted by Eientstein even if they have near zero mass ... because the equations effect ENERGY, and mass is merely one form of energy. As a result, the spinning blade will NOT ONLY undergo gyrospcopic resistance to changes in angular orientation (being waved around), but will ALSO suffer SOME DEGREE (unknown) of relativistic gravitic effects. In effect, the blade may acquire some 'virtual mass' - FROM the relative standpoint of the user. Further, these effects will produce a form of 'event horizon' effect at the boundary (not incompatable with Zeldovich's 'virtual light' predictions I assume) which you would expect could account for the noise, the glow and the terrible destructive capabilities of the 'light' blade. Sabres and Blasters related?

Now comes the REAL speculation! It was postulated in Model Three (Field contained plasmoids) that the Sabre beam may be related to the Blaster Bolt - as though the sabre were a 'static' gunshot, or more correctly, that the blaster bolt is a 'mobile sabre blade'. This is a fascinating idea, but it has a serious drawback ... there are instances in the films where damage is done BEFORE the visible part of the bolt arrives. the 'contained' model CANNOT explain this... BUT the 'virtual light' model CAN. *IF* Blasters and sabres originate from the same principle technology, then blasters MAY be such 'spinning fields' which can exist for a time on their own, and can be projected along a vector (ie: fired!). Such a 'bolt' would indeed leave a TRAIL OF LIGHT in its wake! The 'damage' may well be done BEFORE the visible part of the bolt arrives! Since a blaster is like a sabre, and since sabres block one-another, a sabre can block a blaster bolt! BUT this would be VERY VERY difficult to do because the sabre blade is so thin, and the blaster bolt so very fast! A Turbolaser may be a rotating field of larger diameter. Perhaps such larger fields would retain their coherence for longer (after leaving the emitter) and thus have greater range. If the field integrity decays beyond a certain point, its rapid rotation may cause it to 'explode' beyond a certain distance from the emitter. This would explain the 'flak bursts' observed in the film when some shots miss their targets. The asteroid hit by the Star Destroyer in TESB would first be 'drilled into' by the bolt, then exploded (vaporized in fact!) from within when the bolt's rotation collapsed - it would essentially have had its constituent atoms ripped apart from the inside out!

take it or leave it... If it works wooo hooo if not aaaaa what a loss....


Lightsaber....

OK I wil probally sound a moron for this, but couldnt the use of a solid state laser be used for this kind of thing ? Give the hilt a form of lens that allows tight focus, but minimal distance on the lightbeam....however the lightbeam would probally be invisible unless some form of colour could be applied....Sorry for by limited knownledge on lasers.