Superlaser theory

[theta_pinch]

Recently I've been thinking of a theory on how superlaser might work; here is my solution:

The superlaser beam is made up of an exotic kind of particle with massive angular momentum and disrupts the nuclear force. The superlaser destroys the planet in this way: 1. The superlaser "drills" down to the core of the planet.
2. The iron at the core of the planet is resistant to the effects of the superlaser due to it's high binding energy/nuclear stability. The iron core becomes saturated with the "superlaser particles" and the iron eventually undergoes a nuclear reaction releasing energy.
3. The energy from the exploding core causes the rest of the planet to break up and be ejected at high velocity hence the explosion.
4. Angular momentum transferred to the core in step 2 causes diffuse dust to spin forming an expanding accretion disc.
5. The superlaser particles still being formed as part of the reaction keeps producing large amounts of energy in the ring making it appear to stay the same intensity.
6. Electromagnetic radiation from the ring produces light pressure on fragments of Alderaan slowing them down to below the solar systems' escape velocity.

What do you think about this theory?

[Mike DiCenso]

I'm not sure what to think of this since your description of what you think the superlaser basically says that the way the SL works is how the TNG TM describes the way a phaser works, combined in turn with elements of the "Material Dependency" fallacy of certain Star Wars debaters.
-Mike

[theta_pinch]

I'm not sure what to think of this since your description of what you think the superlaser basically says that the way the SL works is how the TNG TM describes the way a phaser works, combined in turn with elements of the "Material Dependency" fallacy of certain Star Wars debaters.
-Mike

Well it was somewhat inspired from the NDF theory but it does explain the superlaser effects without imvoking extra dimensions, impossible energy sources, or exotic chain reactions. Also the Nuclear disruption phaser theory is in doubt because if it disrupted the nuclear force then iron would be the best.defense because it is the most stable element and phasers don't seem to have any problem with disintegrating iron.

Edit: are you implying that it's a bad hypothesis because it has similarities to other unrelated things?
Double edit: do you mean I committed plagiarism?

[2046]

I haven't done the math, but:

1. Fusing iron is not exactly a great way to produce energy. In fact, I'm pretty sure it sucks . . . energy, that is. So, you're probably driving up the energy requirement overall.

DET is too simple a theory and doesn't jive with the reactor or the rings (just to name a couple of problems), so any new theory should do well with both. Making it more energy-intensive runs contrary to the reactor.

2. The whole angular momentum thing is a nifty twist, but I don't think it satisfactorily explains the planar effects on Death Stars or even ships. Maybe if the Death Star explosions had featured a Trek-like "spinblast" effect (where an exploding ship rotates really fast in the frames before it explodes) then you'd have something to go on, maybe . . . but I'm no expert on angular momentum of particles in aggregate.

In other words, I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of how all this angular momentum happens to 'polarize' out in the same direction . . . feels kind of ad hoc.

3. The notion of the particle generation being self-sustaining at the target is interesting, but wouldn't that also involve the angular momentum issue?

4. Light pressure is almost certainly insufficient to slow the fragments. I mean, if it was bright enough, sure, but by that point the energy density would be such that it would probably be as likely to pull debris along. Suffice it to say, broken pieces of planet are not solar sails.

Did you have a disagreement with the Superlaser Effect concept, hence the search for an alternative? I see where you say you wish to "explain the superlaser effects without imvoking extra dimensions, impossible energy sources, or exotic chain reactions", but:

A. Star Wars canonically has at least one extra dimension, called hyperspace.
B. You basically just made an exotic chain reaction anyway.

Honestly, if I were wanting to avoid the things you're wanting to avoid, I'd call it a midichlorian beam and say it Force-pushed the planet from the inside, or something, causing excess heating (hence the fiery effects).

[theta_pinch]

I haven't done the math, but:

1. Fusing iron is not exactly a great way to produce energy. In fact, I'm pretty sure it sucks . . . energy, that is. So, you're probably driving up the energy requirement overall.

Yes; that's because it's binding energy is so high; however if you had a particle that disrupts the nuclear force and can force the iron to undergo fission with less energy expended than the binding energy then you would get a large energy gain.

2. The whole angular momentum thing is a nifty twist, but I don't think it satisfactorily explains the planar effects on Death Stars or even ships. Maybe if the Death Star explosions had featured a Trek-like "spinblast" effect (where an exploding ship rotates really fast in the frames before it explodes) then you'd have something to go on, maybe . . . but I'm no expert on angular momentum of particles in aggregate.

In other words, I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of how all this angular momentum happens to 'polarize' out in the same direction . . . feels kind of ad hoc.

Somewhat Ad Hoc.

3. The notion of the particle generation being self-sustaining at the target is interesting, but wouldn't that also involve the angular momentum issue?

I'm not sure.

4. Light pressure is almost certainly insufficient to slow the fragments. I mean, if it was bright enough, sure, but by that point the energy density would be such that it would probably be as likely to pull debris along. Suffice it to say, broken pieces of planet are not solar sails.

Yes, probably.

Did you have a disagreement with the Superlaser Effect concept, hence the search for an alternative? I see where you say you wish to "explain the superlaser effects without imvoking extra dimensions, impossible energy sources, or exotic chain reactions", but:

A. Star Wars canonically has at least one extra dimension, called hyperspace.
B. You basically just made an exotic chain reaction anyway.

No I have no problem with the superlaser effect.

Honestly, if I were wanting to avoid the things you're wanting to avoid, I'd call it a midichlorian beam and say it Force-pushed the planet from the inside, or something, causing excess heating (hence the fiery effects).

[/quote]

[Jasonb]

That practice i always believe it Star War Weapon general. Ran that theory how can explain X-wing take second to exposed while a while turrbow blaster the power destroy piece of space rocket. In practice add to super laser theory lot of sense.

[Mike DiCenso]

I'm not sure what to think of this since your description of what you think the superlaser basically says that the way the SL works is how the TNG TM describes the way a phaser works, combined in turn with elements of the "Material Dependency" fallacy of certain Star Wars debaters.
-Mike

Well it was somewhat inspired from the NDF theory but it does explain the superlaser effects without imvoking extra dimensions, impossible energy sources, or exotic chain reactions. Also the Nuclear disruption phaser theory is in doubt because if it disrupted the nuclear force then iron would be the best.defense because it is the most stable element and phasers don't seem to have any problem with disintegrating iron.

Edit: are you implying that it's a bad hypothesis because it has similarities to other unrelated things?
Double edit: do you mean I committed plagiarism?

I'm not quite willing to call what you did plagiarism, but were I a Warsie, I would probably say that, and be dismissive of your theory on the basis that you are trying to impose phaser effects onto my beloved DET weapon.
-Mike

[Sandyin]

Are there really still people out there clinging to a DET Superlaser? I would have though the Death Star novel would have put an end to that for all but the most diehard adherents.

[Mike DiCenso]

Yes, there are. And the premise of the Zombie Inflationism threads cover the possible ways in which some Warsies will try to keep an ICS-level power Star Wars going, despite the new Disney canon.
-Mike

[theta_pinch]

Are there really still people out there clinging to a DET Superlaser? I would have though the Death Star novel would have put an end to that for all but the most diehard adherents.

I was on spacebattles and said that and this is what the person posted:

Besides, that EU quote does not say that it uses some weird technobabble effect to get around the energy requirement, it says that part of the planet's mass was boosted into hyperspace as a side effect of the sheer power of the blast. In other words, it was so powerful it basically ripped a new #!!hole into the fabric of spacetime. 1e38 joules is an extreme low-end.

EDIT: Furthermore, it's specifically stated that the superlaser is just an upscaled turbolaser weapon, using the exact same technology. As mass (or at least, not any significant amount) isn't blasted into hyperspace every time a turbolaser is fired, that proves it has nothing to do with the nature of the weapon, but was rather a side effect from just how powerful it was. Trying to twist this to downplay it is &$cking retarded, but of course what can you expect of a Trekta!!/Darkstar %@#!$@#@!#$$@?

I've removed parts of the curses. This is where the original post is: http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/ ... 117/page-6