June 3, 2004 in Star Wars: General Discussion
148 members have voted
Guys, the fact that a saber is weightless has been mentioned many many times in the books and referenced in some movies. You don't have to be a "technical geek" (btw, how would that be a technical geek anyway...). Also, saberwhips are doomed to failure. I've seen some precident of sabers being able to marginally bend (Rebel Stand?), but my source is a very strange NJO book. Also, they can't go to whip capacity. It's been mentioned before that sabers are especially hard to control (I forget exactly due to what but I think it has something to do with virbrations). Also, why would it touching the ground make it drain energy extra fast? Find some precident for that (I'm probably just wrong so show me a good source and I will believe you). Saberwhips... This is SW, not whatever weird other Sci-Fi. Saberwhips might be plausible in some situation... but probably not. Now say laser whips and I will agree and show you the Obi Wan and Qui Gon series (forget what it is called) and give you an example.
How come when ever someone has a difference of opinion in a forum they are always called
dude... i just realized that by "saber whip" you guys were refering to an ACTUAL whip (i thought you guys were refering to something similar to a "pistol whip".. where you take the gun and **** slap someone with it). I didn't understand why everyone hated the idea SO MUCH... i mean... i thought it would be kinda cool to see your character smack a dude on the head with his saber. Didn't really think it should go in the game... but thought it would look cool.
But in regaurds to a REAL lightsaber WHIP:
THAT IS JUST ABOUT THE MOST DAMN RETARDED THING I HAVE EVER HEARD OF.
sorry for the caps lock... added it for emphisis.
I've heard worse...most of them have been on this forum. But, yeah it's a really pathetic idea. Right now i'm just trying to prove that it's pathetic.
I think the poll can speak volumes in your place.
BTW... one more vote needs to be subtracted from "yes" and placed in "no". See my previous post if you seek explanation.
Ok, I'm gonna make a post in this topic...they could incorporate a "saberwhip" in the game for those who want one and those people could use a "saberwhip" and the ones who think it sounds stupid could not use it, that way everybody wins.
If they come out the way Operation Flashpoint did, i can make one.
I was on several Mod. teams for that game. The mods was the reason for the popularity of OFP. maybe obsidian wont be so uptight with this game...i hope we will see mod programs. "im a graphics artist, just to let you guys know" i dont work for a company, but i make my money.
"smartass reply expected"
Interviews have told us that OE arn't making any mod tools for the game. So modding is going to be just that little bit more tiresome.
Icebox, putting something in to please a few people is still putting the damn thing in.
And whats wrong with putting it in. If you don't want to use it then don't use it. Simple as that.
Because the abomination would still be there.
Oh poor baby...throws a hissy fit just cause someone thinks up a weapon he doesn't like.
It's not that it'd be including a weapon I don't like, its because it doesn't fit in with Star Wars.
And how doesn't it fit in with star wars.
because star wars is a blend of classic european knighthood with futureistic science fiction. Name one instance where you can recall a midieval knight weilding a whip.
when was a whip created? After the medieval ages...hell no..the whip is older than medieveal ages..hence a ledgendary weapon. Btw...its a blend of more than classic euro. knighthood.
The whip was used for many thing but never as a weapon (since its a god damn stupid weapon) but more as a instrument of disipline to inflict pain.
Its no "legendary weapon" unless is the "legendary weapon of king Moron the First and Last because its army was outfited with such weapon" since I am not eben going to say how ****ing stupid would be to try to use it againts someone protected with something as clothing ... oh wait I just said that.
Jedi are knights. Plain and simple. They are modled off of knights of enlish lore. Plain and simple. Find me ONE valid example of a Knight using a whip as a weapon in battle and I'll support your idea FULLY.
It fits with SW, but not with the Jedi. Maybe the sith would use it... Think about it, what sitiuation is the whip most commonly associated with? It's a weapon of pain. It's easier to disarm someone with a sword than a whip. It's easier to kill someone with a sword than a whip, but also easier to control. The jedi are about balance and control, not what the whip is about.
Heh... I think it would be better to break the arguments into possibilities.
Lightsaber- A hilt, which can be triggered to get the extremely hot and glowing tube out of it. Pissiblities?
The first instinct would be to think it's energy (lazer technologies) wrong: the lazer is a ray of energy in the form of volumetric light and heat, as we all know, the rays may not have an end in any case (unless the emmiter is off, and then it becomes a line travelling infinitely in the direction of emmiting, which still means no end to advancement of it.) If it is energy in any form, than there would have to be a perfect reflector on the top. This would bring the necessity of the central pole in the blade, which holds the reflecting disk (or whatever the form you imagine it,) and of course not only it would be hard to really stop it (although it would solve the question of power use, just one shot is enough o keep it up forever,) but any tiniest fluctuation of the reflectors (One must also then be included at bottom) would result in colossal outcomes. Thus pure energy blade for the lightsaber if made, still requires something solid in it, and will involve risks beyond measure, which makes it obsolete.
The next thing I though of would be another combination of light and heat - Plasma. Plasma, unlike energy, is a state of substance, furthermore, it has side effects of extreme heat and light emmission. Also, unlike energy, plasma is substantial, thus is dependant on gravity. All we need is the plasma to take the form of a cylinder, which may be achieved by extreme magtnetic fields... This would still require something solid in the blade, but would take care of endlessness in the previous part, and allow flexibility to the blade (as it would stick to it.) Though it would be really expencive (expensive?) to create a rod which can resist temperatures so high. Thus, it might be possible, though expensive (expencive?) to create the "lightsaber" AND "lightwhip" but it would still leave the problem with turning it off and add the problem of great energy consumption...
Conclusion: No "energy" weapons are possible, but plasma based recreations of idea of "lightsaber" and "lightwhip" ideas would be realistic... in... 20,000 years. =/
The question is would you use either of them. And would they be able to "reflect" the ranged attacks. Also this concept adds another point - in a "saber lock" the sword which has more gravity force drains the other lightsaber, which would make it rational to use a "blaster" in conjunction to lightsaber.
P.S. This also solves the problem with physics, for the blade would have the weight of it's mass (the saber is completely substantial) enhanced with the gravity between the saber and the land (and both are emmiters, and the smaller has to have bigger value of gravity force, which would make it really hard to wield, thus a jedi would have to have an extraordinary physical development.)
But it's just fiction, so I will go and enjoy it without all that crap. It's just the moment when Luke arrives at Dagobah to meet Yoda, I like the scene so much... And I wouldn't use a lightwhip...
Whoa. I almost understood what you said too.
I think we all know that sabers of light can't be built, but question: how would a crystal that focuses energy fit into your theory? That was a SW lore provoked question.
I heard somewhere that energy naturally forms bars, wouldn't there be a way in theory to cause the energy flow to be released after a certain point, and thus making it have a specific length. I imagine it would look more like a flaming sword if that were to happen with the energy at the end dispersing.
that was gona be my next point...how the hell would light just stop? all good opinions tho.
I'd guess there would be a dispersal effect somehow. Maybe the energy can' sustain that straight linyness and breaks apart somehow...
doesn't give all the answers, but here... essential reading
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!]
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!