Particle shields and Kinetic Impacts

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

You seem to be constantly alternating between the idea of your leptons being trapped in a field and being shot out in a spray.

The visual evidence strongly implies a dense, thin field CLOSE to the hull that is filled with your leptons (maybe 10m thick by Wong's reckoning, whether the field has leptons in it or not). If they are all trapped in the field, then even if the lepton sticks to the thing, the simple fact is that the momentum gets transferred into the field that HOLDS the lepton in place, and it works back.

In BOTH cases, the transfer is not instantaneous, and the momentum will be absorbed in about the same amount of time, with similar reaction forces.

Actually, a 1kg projectile at 95% of lightspeed does have great momentum, but its KE:momentum ratio is low. Destroying the object does nothing to reduce the total momentum transfer, not to mention that things are never truly destroyed or created.

You can avoid part of that by shooting it out in a spray with something to catch only the returnees, but I've described potential problems of the spray in an earlier reply. You can also make the lepton zone "thicker" (say to 20m) to reduce instantaneous impulse forces but you can do that with a simple forcefield too.

[omegaLancer]

Problem is what is a force field... Generally in physics, forces are traditional transmited via bosons ( photons, Glouns, W+,W-,Z0, gravitron ( if they exist)) .. Momentum is exchange when these particle react with a another particle ( it the catching the million baseball effect all over).. Virtual Photona are exchange between charge particles, so a force field would using via photons would require emitters (charge plates, magnetic coils).actually any force exchange is via some kind of particles interaction and some kind of emitter..

Problem is what kind of particle and what series of interactions....

As for nuetrino, funny the fact is that nuetrino was first throught to exist do to missing momentum from the decay of a neutron to a proton and electron.. So Fermi and couple of physicist figure that the extra momentum was being carried away by a small neutral particle.. amazing thing even a neutrino can bear the burden of momentum transfer..

[Darth Wong]

Problem is what is a force field... Generally in physics, forces are traditional transmited via bosons ( photons, Glouns, W+,W-,Z0, gravitron ( if they exist)) .. Momentum is exchange when these particle react with a another particle ( it the catching the million baseball effect all over).. Virtual Photona are exchange between charge particles, so a force field would using via photons would require emitters (charge plates, magnetic coils).actually any force exchange is via some kind of particles interaction and some kind of emitter..

Problem is what kind of particle and what series of interactions....

Technically speaking, all impacts are forcefield impacts. The tiny magnetic forcefields of the electrons in a solid object repel the tiny magnetic forcefields of the electrons in the impactor.

As for nuetrino, funny the fact is that nuetrino was first throught to exist do to missing momentum from the decay of a neutron to a proton and electron.. So Fermi and couple of physicist figure that the extra momentum was being carried away by a small neutral particle.. amazing thing even a neutrino can bear the burden of momentum transfer.

True, but it doesn't work as a method of eliminating impacts. It's a bit like saying that you can eliminate the impact of a snowball by throwing a snowball in the same direction at the same time the first one hits the back of your head. Since your body serves as the intermediate stage, the momentum transfer goes through you and you still have to deal with it.

[omegaLancer]

Not all fields get weaker as you get farther away, the strong force actually get stronger and at a finite distant, goes close to infinite ....

And there is a belief that there is a fifth force ( a type of anti gravity) that doesnot begin till you get many AU away from gravity source..

But the fact is the meteor act like they hit a wall... A force field would not be a wall.. ( not unless we are talking of a new kind of force) a field would have a gradual deacceleration as the force grows stronger, we should witness the on coming meteor slow and then stop, especially if it a type of antigrav.....The max power of the field would be on the ship, or the 0 point of field generators...

And you would not be able to walk thru it, instead as you get closer to the shield the more force would be apply against you, and you would be repulse..This doesnot happen to the walkers or Battle droid.. they walk thru the shield. The droid in TPM stop and struggle against an unseen force ( Yes we see it the force field in the atomsphere of the planet) and just continue moving as if passing thru a substance...

you only see an electron, or any particle if they emit a photons, in a space if not accelerated or interacting they would be unseen..

In SWEGTWAT they show on a ISD not only a shield generator ( I know those dromes are not shield generator. But also a shield projector and shield relays)

Problem is not many forces would act on Nuetral matter ( gravity is the best choice ) for a force field cause it work on matter no matter the charge, problem is the spin of gravitron work to attract matter not repel..

so the Particle screen is the easiest solution to match what seen..

It may not be Cannon, but in Last book of the "Black fleet crisis" it was stated that an imperial shield begin 30 meters from the hull of the ship. So we would have a cloud of particle that 30 meters from in radius..

[His Divine Shadow]

Because they can be shot down in flight, unlike an energy weapon. Unless they're guided missiles, which have not become obsolete, and are still used (although they, too, can be shot down at long range).

Partile impactors accelerated to high fractions of the speed of light can be shot down?
I hardly think so, they've not demonstrated any such accuracy, unless we're talking about ranges of lightseconds here.

There was also a mention of planetary shields making the usage of huuge asteroids accelerated to large velocities becoming obsolete with planetary shields.

No, I still say that shields are no more vulnerable to particle impactors than they are to Turbolaser impacts.

There is no dilemma here. As for official literature which seems to contradict the laws of physics, official literature is of distinctly lower status than canon films, and when official literature ignores the laws of physics without canon precedent, it is in turn ignored.

According to whoose policy?
I certanly can't find it in the Lucasfilm policy.
It's only ignored if it's in direct contradiction with canon, wich it is not.
Your definition seems to imply selective use of Suspension of Disbelief.

And where is the official litterature in violation of physics? Well except every single book with ships and FTL drives and the force and it's ilk :p

Coming to think of it, aren't shields in violation of the laws of physics?

[His Divine Shadow]

I don't presume to speculate on the true workings on the shields, I only show the evidence, and it's clear to me, that this "weakness" is no greater than what one would expect against turbolasers or energy weapons, both impart lot's of KE and momentum(same was shown in TESB come to think of it).

[Darth Wong]

Partile impactors accelerated to high fractions of the speed of light can be shot down? I hardly think so, they've not demonstrated any such accuracy, unless we're talking about ranges of lightseconds here.

Any ship which can accelerate a particle impactor of significant mass to a high fraction of c would be destroyed by the recoil unless it is extremely massive.

No, I still say that shields are no more vulnerable to particle impactors than they are to Turbolaser impacts.

Why? Because the official literature says so? Official literature is akin to any book, ie- not a direct observation and therefore subject to correction in light of compelling evidence or the laws of physics.

There is no dilemma here. As for official literature which seems to contradict the laws of physics, official literature is of distinctly lower status than canon films, and when official literature ignores the laws of physics without canon precedent, it is in turn ignored.

According to whoose policy?

Anyone who understands the use of objective methods.

I certanly can't find it in the Lucasfilm policy. It's only ignored if it's in direct contradiction with canon, wich it is not. Your definition seems to imply selective use of Suspension of Disbelief.

Hardly. I also disregard a textbook if it states something which is clearly in violation of the laws of physics (and you'd be surprised how many textbooks contain such mistakes), and I certainly disregard an historical record if it contains obvious falsehoods (eg- the Bible). Does this mean that I don't believe in real life?

I treat official sources in SW the same way I treat historical records or textbooks in real life. What could be a deeper form of suspension of disbelief than that?

And where is the official litterature in violation of physics? Well except every single book with ships and FTL drives and the force and it's ilk :p

That's in violation of physics but it's also canon, which means that it's an observation. In real life, observations trump scientific theories. As for the official literature violating physics, one good example is the claim that the Eclipse-class superlaser is 1/7 as powerful as a Death Star superlaser and can only sear a continent off a planet's surface. The ratio between the melting of a continent and the violent destruction of an entire planet is far, far greater than 7:1 in terms of energy, so this official figure is clearly junk.

Coming to think of it, aren't shields in violation of the laws of physics?

No. They are probably technologically impossible, but given the canon existence of forcefields (eg- tractor beams and atmosphere containment fields) which exert force on electrically neutral objects, they are certainly not impossible in SW. From a scientific standpoint, the math can be easily made to work out, and while that doesn't make something technologically feasible, it does make it scientifically possible (unless you do something silly, like ignoring conservation of momentum).

[His Divine Shadow]

Any ship which can accelerate a particle impactor of significant mass to a high fraction of c would be destroyed by the recoil unless it is extremely massive.

What of self propelled missiles accelerated to extreme velocities? Like Andromeda.
Besides, you've confirmed yourself that SW ships can take recoil in the GT range.

Why? Because the official literature says so? Official literature is akin to any book, ie- not a direct observation and therefore subject to correction in light of compelling evidence or the laws of physics.

I don't see how I can get any more objective.

I don't see how they can break the laws of physics either, because if it stands up to said amount, it just means they got very good bracings, does it not?
They also have force field technologies that work kinda like SIF fields in Trek according to the ICS(on the acclamator section).

There is no dilemma here. As for official literature which seems to contradict the laws of physics, official literature is of distinctly lower status than canon films, and when official literature ignores the laws of physics without canon precedent, it is in turn ignored.

I don't agree simply because I do not see it in the policies defined by Lucasfilm, I accept everything, nomatter how much I might not like it, only direct violations against canon itself are excluded by me.

Anyone who understands the use of objective methods.

I think I've been very objective here.

Hardly. I also disregard a textbook if it states something which is clearly in violation of the laws of physics (and you'd be surprised how many textbooks contain such mistakes), and I certainly disregard an historical record if it contains obvious falsehoods (eg- the Bible). Does this mean that I don't believe in real life?

No, but I don't consider the novels in the same light as you do, I don't compare them to our universe, I compare them to the movies of that universe.

I treat official sources in SW the same way I treat historical records or textbooks in real life. What could be a deeper form of suspension of disbelief than that?

I treat them as if it was real.
Anyhow, wich points where contradictory to you?

Is it impossible that SW has good enough bracings to take punishment of the kind I am talking about? Or that turbolasers have enough intensity to push a ship? What about the GT of recoil in laser canons? Or the TL bolt visibly shoving the MF?

That's in violation of physics but it's also canon, which means that it's an observation. In real life, observations trump scientific theories. As for the official literature violating physics, one good example is the claim that the Eclipse-class superlaser is 1/7 as powerful as a Death Star superlaser and can only sear a continent off a planet's surface. The ratio between the melting of a continent and the violent destruction of an entire planet is far, far greater than 7:1 in terms of energy, so this official figure is clearly junk.

One could easily fix that quote to mesh with canon, wich I do by saying that either the superlaser assembly could handle that much energy but the ship can't generate it, or that the ship can generate it, but the superlaser assembly cannot handle that much "juice".

Given that an Executor SSD has enough power to use a gravitic device to cause planetary disruption indicates the latter to me.


Anyhow, that argument is not what I am interested in, the only real points I am interested in are:
1. violations, please point them out, I am ignorant
2. Why cannot SW bracings be good enough to handle large amounts of momentum that mostly negates any weakness to KE impactors? Given that SW guns themselves create GT range recoil, something you have accepted, and they can use forcefields to strenghten this

Also, consider that SW shields do these things to alleviate certain things:
1. They can "flex" in order to minimize stress
2. They are not a hard line but they extend quite some bit, getting weaker in intensity the further away they are.

These things would allow SW shields to dampen the effects of kinetic impactors easier too.

[AdmiralKanos]

What of self propelled missiles accelerated to extreme velocities? Like Andromeda.

That takes time and long distances, during which the projectile can be shot down. Even a very fast projectile at very long distance can be shot down, and at short range, it won't have time to accelerate to such velocity.

I don't see how I can get any more objective.

Equating books to observations is not objective.

One could easily fix that quote to mesh with canon, wich I do by saying that either the superlaser assembly could handle that much energy but the ship can't generate it, or that the ship can generate it, but the superlaser assembly cannot handle that much "juice".

And how does this change the fact that the text says the superlaser is 1/7th as powerful as the DS superlaser which is actually more than a dozen orders of magnitude more powerful? Either way, you're altering the official text to fit what you know to be correct based on a combination of canon and physics: the book does not say that the reactor is 1/7 as powerful as the DS reactor but the superlaser would fry, or that the superlaser can handle 1/7 of DS-level energy but there's nothing to back it up so it's a meaningless theoretical figure; it simply says that the superlaser is 1/7 as powerful, and as with all weapons, a power rating is inclusive of both the weapon assembly and any necessary power sources.

1. violations, please point them out, I am ignorant

Countless. Look at the official description of a lightsabre, for example. And I already gave one example which you could not explain without basically altering the official text to make sense, thus proving my point.

2. Why cannot SW bracings be good enough to handle large amounts of momentum that mostly negates any weakness to KE impactors? Given that SW guns themselves create GT range recoil, something you have accepted, and they can use forcefields to strenghten this

I never said they couldn't be. I only said that the limiting factor was support brackets, thanks to conservation of momentum, in an effort to help people understand the differences between physical impacts and energy transfer. However, it's interesting that you should mention "Slave Ship", since that book clearly indicates that massive bracings are required, not that they have some mystical method for doing away with momentum.

Also, consider that SW shields do these things to alleviate certain things:
1. They can "flex" in order to minimize stress

Steel beams flex too. BTW, flexure doesn't minimize stress; stress is always precisely identical to load, thanks to Newton's third law. Flexure (ie- strain) actually absorbs energy, and it's a matter of degrees. A ductile steel alloy can easily do 10%, which is probably as great as shields or greater.

2. They are not a hard line but they extend quite some bit, getting weaker in intensity the further away they are.

Then why do objects appear to hit an invisible solid wall before exploding? The effect must be short-ranged.

These things would allow SW shields to dampen the effects of kinetic impactors easier too.

So what? The momentum must still be transferred; all they do is lengthen the time of transfer.

[AdmiralKanos]

But the fact is the meteor act like they hit a wall... A force field would not be a wall.. ( not unless we are talking of a new kind of force) a field would have a gradual deacceleration as the force grows stronger, we should witness the on coming meteor slow and then stop, especially if it a type of antigrav.....The max power of the field would be on the ship, or the 0 point of field generators...

Nevertheless, we have canon evidence of forcefields which behave like walls, so we must accept their existence. And I remind you that an actual solid wall only repels incoming physical objects because of electromagnetic forcefields.

And you would not be able to walk thru it, instead as you get closer to the shield the more force would be apply against you, and you would be repulse..This doesnot happen to the walkers or Battle droid.. they walk thru the shield. The droid in TPM stop and struggle against an unseen force ( Yes we see it the force field in the atomsphere of the planet) and just continue moving as if passing thru a substance...

Yet we also see fast-moving projectiles being blocked easily by this same forcefield, with no leakage through the barrier. In other words, we are observing a forcefield. What sort of random particle field is so diffuse that droids can walk through yet so dense that high-velocity projectiles bounce off?

Yes, it's strange that they can make forcefields whose focal point is planar, at a fixed distance from the projector rather than being in the projector itself. However, it's also canon, and it certainly makes more sense than a particle field which allows droids to walk through but makes high-velocity projectiles bounce off as if striking armour.

you only see an electron, or any particle if they emit a photons, in a space if not accelerated or interacting they would be unseen..

They would be interacting if they exist at the density or velocity necessary to block solid objects, and you would have to explain why droids can push their way through.

Problem is not many forces would act on Nuetral matter ( gravity is the best choice ) for a force field cause it work on matter no matter the charge, problem is the spin of gravitron work to attract matter not repel.

Too bad. We have more than enough canon evidence of forcefield devices acting on neutral matter in SW to be forced to accept it.

so the Particle screen is the easiest solution to match what seen.

Only if you ignore conservation of momentum, the ability of droids to push through, etc.

It may not be Cannon, but in Last book of the "Black fleet crisis" it was stated that an imperial shield begin 30 meters from the hull of the ship. So we would have a cloud of particle that 30 meters from in radius.

It was not 30m in ROTJ, and ROTJ is canon. Besides, 30m is hopelessly inadequate to eliminate the conservation of momentum problem. You need to blow an impactor apart at hundreds or thousands of metres distance in order for randomized ejecta to miss the ship in sufficient ratios to make a difference.

[His Divine Shadow]

Countless. Look at the official description of a lightsabre, for example. And I already gave one example which you could not explain without basically altering the official text to make sense, thus proving my point.

You misunderstand, I was not looking for violations of physics from the EU in general, but in those that I pointed out, Dreadnaught being shoved, Nr ship taking impacts from a planetary railgun and it's shields overloading the conventional way before their bracings gave out.

I never said they couldn't be. I only said that the limiting factor was support brackets, thanks to conservation of momentum, in an effort to help people understand the differences between physical impacts and energy transfer. However, it's interesting that you should mention "Slave Ship", since that book clearly indicates that massive bracings are required, not that they have some mystical method for doing away with momentum.

Well goodie then, the shield generators most likely have massive bracings you know.
And it fits with particle impactors not being the great menace they are said to be, and not breaking laws of physics, why can't we all be happy and invade the UFP?
Thats all that concerns me, all this other stuff, it's just bogging the discussion down.

Then why do objects appear to hit an invisible solid wall before exploding? The effect must be short-ranged.

Because at the lower intensities farther away it does not noticably affect them?
Shields are also said to interact violently with objects, like frying humans for example.

So what? The momentum must still be transferred; all they do is lengthen the time of transfer

Well my reasoning was that lenghtening the time, would help the bracings cope better, than it all coming in one quick bang, so to speak, ofcourse I am ignorant and worthless and I grovel in the dirt seeking enlightenment.

[His Divine Shadow]

MW, why didn't the droidekas even flinch when they where hit by their own blaster fire in TPM?
Given the recoil it had when they fired.

[Darth Wong]

MW, why didn't the droidekas even flinch when they where hit by their own blaster fire in TPM? Given the recoil it had when they fired.

HDS, don't be silly. A droideka's entire body contains an onboard power supply and shield generator, and it is much, much heavier than his flimsy gun-arm. That's why they don't get knocked backward by the return-fire even though their arms jerk backward when firing.

As for "flinching", that's a human response. A machine need not do any such thing. If the momentum transfer isn't sufficient to move the entire droid, you won't see any reaction.

PS. If you want proof that momentum is transferred by collisions in SW (a silly demand if you ask me, since the laws of physics demand it), watch TESB. See how the Falcon is thrown off-axis by the TL blast? Also watch ANH. See how Vader's fighter is thrown off-course by a collision with another TIE fighter, despite his shields? I repeat: any official literature which postulates shields which eliminate momentum not only violates the laws of physics, but also numerous incidents in the canon movies.

[His Divine Shadow]

HDS, don't be silly. A droideka's entire body contains an onboard power supply and shield generator, and it is much, much heavier than his flimsy gun-arm. That's why they don't get knocked backward by the return-fire even though their arms jerk backward when firing.

Actually, I was just checking what you thought of it, not using it as argument to try and prove you wrong, I do prefer the explanation wich favors conversation of momentum, for obvious reasons, I guessed the droid deka attached itself or something to the ground, like an artillery battery, just interested to see your take on it.

Don't consider me your opponent, but your friendly local evil madman, that should help alot with getting rid of mis-understandings

[His Divine Shadow]

I repeat: any official literature which postulates shields which eliminate momentum not only violates the laws of physics, but also numerous incidents in the canon movies.

Oh I don't think there are any, just because KE weaponry is nowhere as usefull as stipulated does not mean that.

Infact, shields, and your explanation, helps to understand the reason for why this is so, because in the past, they would hit the hull, now the effects of that(well momentum anyway, KE should be dissipated as neutrinos or waste heat) is transferred to a series of force-field reinforced bracings capacle of taking gigaton levels of punishment(probably alot more).

[His Divine Shadow]

Stipulated, speculated, bring back editing, this is like using nukes to catch vermin.

[omegaLancer]

I throught that the following article would be interesting side note to our discussion, it deals with electrical anti-rpg system that is being tested by the english..:

British 'force field' protects tanks by zapping grenades
By Michael Smith
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH


LONDON — An electric "force field" for armored vehicles that vaporizes anti-tank grenades and shells on impact has been developed by scientists at Britain's Ministry of Defense. Top Stories
• Rumsfeld says al Qaeda in Iraq
• Linder beats Barr in Georgia primary
• Mayor 'proud' of his term
• Stewart a top donor to Democrat coffers
• U.S. seeks new regime in Zimbabwe
• No conversion for tavern tunes
• Ex-Navy pilot's lawsuit dismissed


The "electric armor" has been developed in an attempt to make tanks and other armored vehicles lighter and less vulnerable to grenade launchers such as those used by Taliban and al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan.
It could be fitted to the light tanks and armored personnel carriers (APCs) that will replace the heavy Challenger II tanks and Warrior APCs in one of the two British armored divisions.
The ubiquitous RPG-7, a rocket-propelled grenade, can be picked up for a mere $10 in many of the world's trouble spots and is capable of destroying a tank and killing its crew.
When the grenade hits the tank, its "shaped-charge" warhead fires a jet of hot copper into the target at about 1,000 mph. It is capable of penetrating more than a foot of conventional solid-steel armor.
The new electric armor is made up of a highly charged capacitor that is connected to two separate metal plates on the tank's exterior. The outer plate, which is bulletproof and made from an unspecified alloy, is grounded, and the insulated inner plate is live.
The electric armor runs off the tank's power supply. When the tank commander feels he is in a dangerous area, he simply switches on the current to the inner plate.
When the warhead fires its jet of molten copper, it penetrates both the outer plate and the insulation of the inner plate. This makes a connection, and thousands of amps of electricity vaporize most of the molten copper. The rest of the copper is dispersed harmlessly against the vehicle's hull.
Despite the high charge, the electrical load on the battery is no more than that caused by starting the engine on a cold morning.
In a recent demonstration of the electric armor for senior army officers, an APC protected by the new British system survived repeated attacks by rocket-propelled grenades that would typically have destroyed it several times over.
Many of the grenades were fired from point-blank range, but the only damage to the APC was cosmetic. The vehicle was driven away under its own power.
Professor John Brown of the Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, which developed the "pulsed power system," said it was attracting a lot of interest from both the British Defense Ministry and the Pentagon.
With the easy availability of RPG-7 rocket launchers, "it only takes one individual on, say, a rooftop in a village to cause major damage or destroy passing armored vehicles," he said