Protons or Photons?

[PayBack]

A curse on the Tie Fighter and other games, as I find it hard to think of concussion and photon torps as anything as pathetic... it sounds like they're not, but hey I've had that thought in my head for so long now.

Is there anywhere that lists the varies missiles/torps/bombs by yield? I know some are listed in main site (SW vs ST in 5 mins) but is there a more comprehensive list for missiles?

[Omega-185]

Ok I learned from a very reliable source that, if you must know it was an engineer, Photons are the particle form of light. They have almost no mass. Protons, along with neutrons, are subatomic particles making up the neuclleus of an atom. They are very massive. I still have almost no clue which is better but so far i'm leaning towards Protons.

One thing you need to keep in mind is that mass doesn't matter so much as energy does. A photon with more energy is better than proton.

While I personly disagree with the board's conculsion about the relitve strengths of photon and proton torpedos, I wont get into that because it will just end in flames but you can PM and I could recomend some alternet reading on the subject.

[Ghost Rider]

Ok I learned from a very reliable source that, if you must know it was an engineer, Photons are the particle form of light. They have almost no mass. Protons, along with neutrons, are subatomic particles making up the neuclleus of an atom. They are very massive. I still have almost no clue which is better but so far i'm leaning towards Protons.

One thing you need to keep in mind is that mass doesn't matter so much as energy does. A photon with more energy is better than proton.

While I personly disagree with the board's conculsion about the relitve strengths of photon and proton torpedos, I wont get into that because it will just end in flames but you can PM and I could recomend some alternet reading on the subject.

Gotta love a coward's response to critques. When you cannot show why another conclusions are wrong, claim it'll end in tears.

[Stark]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

I'm not sure in what way photon 'heating' is better than proton 'hitting really hard'. Photon torpedoes would be better for cooking, perhaps? If you want to penetrate armour and break things, heating the outer surface seems less useful the poking it with high-velocity masses. For comparable yields.

[Lord Revan]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

I'm not sure in what way photon 'heating' is better than proton 'hitting really hard'. Photon torpedoes would be better for cooking, perhaps? If you want to penetrate armour and break things, heating the outer surface seems less useful the poking it with high-velocity masses. For comparable yields.

IIRC high frequecy photons are more energetic then low freq photon, but you're true that photons of the frequecy have always the same energy and for more energy you need more photons

[PayBack]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

I'm not sure in what way photon 'heating' is better than proton 'hitting really hard'. Photon torpedoes would be better for cooking, perhaps? If you want to penetrate armour and break things, heating the outer surface seems less useful the poking it with high-velocity masses. For comparable yields.

I doubt photon torps use a single photon... and lasers use photons and even now we can pump more energy though one (laser pulse) in a split second than the entire US is using within the same period (that's how they simulated a star exploding).

[PayBack]

Sorry Stark I just realise your single proton comment was in response to Omega... however the rest of my post is still relevant hopefully

[Surlethe]

While I personly disagree with the board's conculsion about the relitve strengths of photon and proton torpedos, I wont get into that because it will just end in flames but you can PM and I could recomend some alternet reading on the subject.

I'm interested. Can you recommend some alternate reading on the subject to me, too, please?

[Batman]

I doubt photon torps use a single photon... and lasers use photons and even now we can pump more energy though one (laser pulse) in a split second than the entire US is using within the same period (that's how they simulated a star exploding).

Thank you for providing nothing whatsoever. Of course photorps don't use a single photon. Stark's question was a completely valid one and your example doesn't say beans about wether or not a single photon can or can not vary in energy content.

[Jedi Guardian]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

I'm not sure in what way photon 'heating' is better than proton 'hitting really hard'. Photon torpedoes would be better for cooking, perhaps? If you want to penetrate armour and break things, heating the outer surface seems less useful the poking it with high-velocity masses. For comparable yields.

I doubt photon torps use a single photon... and lasers use photons and even now we can pump more energy though one (laser pulse) in a split second than the entire US is using within the same period (that's how they simulated a star exploding).

Yes it's true, we even have lasers today that use photonic energy at least i'm sure it's photonic.

[Batman]

Yes it's true, we even have lasers today that use photonic energy at least i'm sure it's photonic.

I'd be intrigued by anybody building a laser that isn't photonic. Are you sure you know what photons (or lasers, for that matter) actually are?

[Surlethe]

Yes it's true, we even have lasers today that use photonic energy at least i'm sure it's photonic.

You know what's amazing? We have light bulbs today that use photonic energy. We even have photonic power generation capabilities.

[Batman]

Yes it's true, we even have lasers today that use photonic energy at least i'm sure it's photonic.

You know what's amazing? We have light bulbs today that use photonic energy.

That reminds me of the 'photonic searchlights' courtesy of some old WK40K Space Marines codex. Gee, a light source that uses photons-who would've thunk it?

[Jedi Guardian]

Ok i'm a huge mess up I guess photons are light and we do have alot of thing that use photonic energy!

[PayBack]

I doubt photon torps use a single photon... and lasers use photons and even now we can pump more energy though one (laser pulse) in a split second than the entire US is using within the same period (that's how they simulated a star exploding).

Thank you for providing nothing whatsoever. Of course photorps don't use a single photon. Stark's question was a completely valid one and your example doesn't say beans about wether or not a single photon can or can not vary in energy content.

And thank you sooo much for your pointless reply also. It meant a lot to me... really. If you read my next post you'll see I explained my mistake. I know what these boards are like but I think you go out of your way to earn the biggest arsehole title.

[Dooey Jo]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

Photons are electromagnetic quanta, but they can carry an arbitrarily high or low amount of energy. Their energy is given by the formula
E = pc
where c is the speed of light and p is the momentum of the photon, which in turn is given by
p = h / λ
where h is Planck's constant and λ is the wavelength of the photon.

Also, the energy transfer of photons is a bit special. If you detonate a bomb that creates one megaton worth of low-frequency radio waves, you're not going to do much damage to anything. If the bomb creates a megaton worth of high-energy gamma rays, bad things will happen to everyone that is exposed.
The photons produced by M/AM annihilations always have very high energy, depending on the mass of the annihilating particles (E = mc^2).

[Jedi Guardian]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

Photons are electromagnetic quanta, but they can carry an arbitrarily high or low amount of energy. Their energy is given by the formula
E = pc
where c is the speed of light and p is the momentum of the photon, which in turn is given by
p = h / λ
where h is Planck's constant and λ is the wavelength of the photon.

Also, the energy transfer of photons is a bit special. If you detonate a bomb that creates one megaton worth of low-frequency radio waves, you're not going to do much damage to anything. If the bomb creates a megaton worth of high-energy gamma rays, bad things will happen to everyone that is exposed.
The photons produced by M/AM annihilations always have very high energy, depending on the mass of the annihilating particles (E = mc^2).

What?

[Jedi Guardian]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

Photons are electromagnetic quanta, but they can carry an arbitrarily high or low amount of energy. Their energy is given by the formula
E = pc
where c is the speed of light and p is the momentum of the photon, which in turn is given by
p = h / λ
where h is Planck's constant and λ is the wavelength of the photon.

Also, the energy transfer of photons is a bit special. If you detonate a bomb that creates one megaton worth of low-frequency radio waves, you're not going to do much damage to anything. If the bomb creates a megaton worth of high-energy gamma rays, bad things will happen to everyone that is exposed.
The photons produced by M/AM annihilations always have very high energy, depending on the mass of the annihilating particles (E = mc^2).

What?

[Darth Wong]

If this conversation is over your head, shut the fuck up and don't pollute it.

[SirNitram]

And thank you sooo much for your pointless reply also. It meant a lot to me... really. If you read my next post you'll see I explained my mistake. I know what these boards are like but I think you go out of your way to earn the biggest arsehole title.

No. That would be me.

When you make a pointless, incorrect post that shows you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.. You will be criticized. Get used to this. Alternately, if you're gonna be a whiny baby, stop making useless posts that demonstrate you don't know what's going on.

[Ender]

Can a photon even have 'more energy'? I though a single photon was one quanta of energy, and to have more energy you needed more photons?

Yes, photons have energy, it is measured in electron volts (eV)

I'm not sure in what way photon 'heating' is better than proton 'hitting really hard'.

Protons have charge, photons don't. Thus photons are more penetrative and cant' be magnetically deflected,

Photon torpedoes would be better for cooking, perhaps? If you want to penetrate armour and break things, heating the outer surface seems less useful the poking it with high-velocity masses. For comparable yields.

Protons would be stopped by the outer shell, photons cook the inside. Its that more penetrative part.

[Ender]

If this conversation is over your head, shut the fuck up and don't pollute it.

Mike, while it is no where near as fun and far more time consuming, perhaps it would be more practical to try and explain things to the ignorant noobs.

Noobie

the formula provided cant' really be dimplified for you andy more, if you have issues there pull out a textbook. With regards to the differing effects various frequencies though, that is because different energy photons have different wavelengths. This changes how they interact with matter. For example, terahertz range radio waves could replace X rays at airports and such. Perhaps the most readily understood examples is the difference between microwaves and visable light - the way microwaves react results in them penetrating some matter, but being thermalized by water. This is useful for cooking fromt he inside out. Visable light is ery interactive, and thus doesn't penetrate well.

[Stark]

What determines interactability of photons? If both lower and higher frequencies are more interactive than visual, what is the factor? I assume it's related to density of the body as well...

[PayBack]

And thank you sooo much for your pointless reply also. It meant a lot to me... really. If you read my next post you'll see I explained my mistake. I know what these boards are like but I think you go out of your way to earn the biggest arsehole title.

No. That would be me.

When you make a pointless, incorrect post that shows you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.. You will be criticized. Get used to this. Alternately, if you're gonna be a whiny baby, stop making useless posts that demonstrate you don't know what's going on.

Oh and perhaps you should find out what's going on too? He gave me shit right from the start, and in posts where I did know what was going on, and in fact included a post backing my claim... so his attacks were undeserved. I've been reading these forums for ages and I know you get flamed for making false or unproven claims but Batman seems to want to make insulting or sarcastic comments on every single fucking post.

As to the one post I did make that was inaccurate, I posted an explaination and apology immediately afterwards, and still got attacked.. which considering the lack of edit function seems as pointless as he claimed my post to be. I know I'm new here and he's not, so by default I'm in the wrong, but that doesn't mean I just roll over and take shit.

[harbringer]

Ok payback if you have been ghosting like you say you KNOW your being a whiney over sensitive (and defensive) person. If Batman said 'you sheep shagging kiwi' you would have a point he only said you posted something useless.

And I think Protons with mass have to be more effective than a particle with almost no mass... although photons could be effective because they lack the same recoil as say a proton weapon. In the context of big bombs though I back protons becuase of their mass and the fact they won't travel that much slower than the photon.....