View Thread
 Nano-disassembler Weapons Discussion
|
|
| Methuselah |
Posted on 28-09-2005 17:41
|
 Posts: 53 Joined: September 07 2005 |
Inert, what about an enzymatic solution, not a chemical solution? Is it too far fetched to suggest a solution which can survive in the hostile environment of space? After all, bacteria have been with us since the birth of life on this planet and it wasn't a particularly hospitable place back then. I agree that a weapon of such type has no place on the PDS battlespace however, and as such I think we've run the course of this discussion and should move onwards unless anyone has anything new to offer. |
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 28-09-2005 20:42
|
 Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
It's quite possible that such an organism could survive in space. But could it do anything meaningful to hull and armor plating? Can it survive high-voltage armor? Direct contact with hyperspace fields? |
|
|
|
| MDD |
Posted on 28-09-2005 23:19
|
 Posts: 32 Joined: September 26 2005 |
No carbon based micro-organism could survive in space. Space has no liquid water and no oxygen. Space is has no pressure. Every micro-organism requires at least one of those things. So any organism used in space warfare would have to either be non-carbon based, or mutli-cellular with an exretmely rigid exoskeleton (almost like an organic spacecraft). As a side note, an enzymatic reaction is still a chemical reaction. An enzyme is a compound that affects the rate of a given chemical reaction. Anyway, any biological weapon employed in PDS would be like cataclysm all over again. Although i suppose the Hiigarans would likely have developed practical technologies through research of the Beast organism. What if the two fields were combined, nano-machinery with biology to create some sort of techno-organic weapon? Edited by MDD on 28-09-2005 23:24 |
|
|
|
| Inert |
Posted on 28-09-2005 23:39
|
 Posts: 388 Joined: September 08 2005 |
Nothing biological survive in space. In a vacuum, it is ~3K. That's 3 Kelvins, and 0 Kelvin is Absolute Zero. Absolute Zero is the temperature at which no heat is given. Meaning there is no energy. Meaning no chemical reactions or anything will take place. |
|
|
|
| MDD |
Posted on 29-09-2005 00:04
|
|
Posts: 32 Joined: September 26 2005 |
Agreed, the temperature of space itself is cold. But the temperature of objects in space is different. The temperature of something in space is dependent on proximity to a stellar body or other radiative source. Or maybe im wrong. But i think the vacuum is the limiting factor (for organics). But as for there being no energy, thats preposterous (love that word). Theres all kinds of things of things radiating energy all over the place. Thats why radio and x-ray telescopes function. But lets say for the sake of argument there wasn't native energy in space. All you would have to do is coat a surface and then fire a DEW weaopn at the surface. That should give it plenty of energy. Edit: Just remembered. Temperature is the measure of molecular motion. So the only reason that space is cold is because space has no substance. So it's absolute zero. but if youre anywhere near a star its a different story. The solar energy can "heat" an object to thousands of degrees kelvin. Edited by MDD on 29-09-2005 00:07 |
|
|
|
| Inert |
Posted on 29-09-2005 00:45
|
|
Posts: 388 Joined: September 08 2005 |
"Blank" space is measured at ~3 Kelvins. That's like, temperature in the middle of nowhere space. When I said there is no heat, I meant an object at Absolute Zero will give off no heat. |
|
|
|
| Archangel |
Posted on 29-09-2005 01:19
|
|
Posts: 18 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Space isn't entirely empty - solar wind, photons etc. are all there. I believe that scientists measured up to 150 hydrogen atoms per cubic kilometer - thats almost empty, but still not quite... |
|
|
|
| BigFish |
Posted on 29-09-2005 01:23
|
|
Posts: 106 Joined: September 02 2005 |
life can survive in space. well, simple life at least. part of one of the very first moon landers was recovered by an apollo mission, when it was brought back to earth it was found to be covered with the common cold. A virus had survived on the moon for over decade. I cant find a cite of this just now but i will look harder if anyone wants further info
Rampent Kitty-basher
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/10...ang0gu.gif |
|
|
|
| MDD |
Posted on 29-09-2005 04:15
|
|
Posts: 32 Joined: September 26 2005 |
Technically, viruses aren't really life. They are incapable of self propogation. They don't even have a full chain of DNA. They're just a single RNA strand in a protein capsule. Very much the perfect weapon. Against people anyway. Theres always been a big debate as to whether they can be life. I happen not to think so. The likely explanation for the viruses on the moon lander is that they were there before the capsule was launched. Edited by MDD on 29-09-2005 04:16 |
|
|
|
| Norsehound |
Posted on 29-09-2005 08:34
|
|
Posts: 26 Joined: September 07 2005 |
I'm surprised nobody has commented that this nano-tech weaponry proposal sounds remarkably similiar to the beast. In fact, for all we know, the beast was probably a weapons system that evolved on it's own and ended up in God Knows Where space to attack the Nagarrock in hyperspace. I'm not eager to see another incarnation of the beast show up, even if it's a second cousin removed. Resigned.
|
|
|
|
| Cobalt Shiva |
Posted on 29-09-2005 11:55
|
 Posts: 118 Joined: September 07 2005 |
I've read them both - as well as Absolution Gap and Chasm City. And the Melding Plague from Reynold's work infected nanotechnology, and didn't so much consume the ship as warp it - as well as blending the Captain into the vessel until the two were effectively a single being. Plus, Reynolds has great starship names. "This is tactical control..."
|
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 29-09-2005 12:00
|
 Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
There won't be a recurrance of the Beast, if you will have the sense not to mention it in the first place. I don't need paranoids in the RP forum. Continue discussion. |
|
|
|
| CIWS |
Posted on 29-09-2005 16:19
|
 Posts: 54 Joined: September 09 2005 |
Though someone mentioning the Beast does bring up an interesting point. Now, I've not read all the fluff but doesn't PDS include Cataclysm in its background? In which case in all likelyhood countermeasures to nanotech weaponry have already been taken care of. [QUOTE] quote "Blank" space is measured at ~3 Kelvins. That's like, temperature in the middle of nowhere space. When I said there is no heat, I meant an object at Absolute Zero will give off no heat.[/QUOTE] Indeed, but that also means there's no way for an object to lose heat except via radiation. In short freezing is generally the last thing one has to worry about when exposed to vaccuum, suffocation and the pressure differential are likely going to kill you first. That being said you're going to need one helluva vicious enzyme to do any appreciable damage to a hull that can withstand close range nuclear detonations and multi-kilometer per second kinetic impacts. If the fireball can't be seen from orbit you obviously aren't trying hard enough.
There is no 'overkill' only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload'. -Schlock Mercenary |
|
|
|
| Jay |
Posted on 29-09-2005 17:44
|
|
Posts: 9 Joined: September 29 2005 |
Hi, this is my first post; I've been reading the forums for quite a while, and have played a little PDS and am ENTHRALLED. The discussion is what mainly draws me in. All this is so fascinting and I hope to be able to constructively add to this community the way so many of you do. Quote Methuselah wrote: * by Force I mean either electromagnetic, gravitational, strong nuclear or weak nuclear. I just had a question: how would one get the particles close enough for strong and weak nuclear forces to be able to work? I mean, it s requires a heat intense enough to ionize particles, get the particles moving at an astronomical speed, and then react in some way (sounds like fusion, which wouldn't really be a favorable result if one were trying to construct something, based on the intense degree of nergy given off). EDIT: grammar Edited by Jay on 30-09-2005 16:47 |
|
|
|
| BigFish |
Posted on 29-09-2005 18:18
|
|
Posts: 106 Joined: September 02 2005 |
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo12/A12_Experiments_III.html it was bacteria, not viruses. Bacteria are definatly alive. Quote They are incapable of self propogation Enzymes would make poor weapons for the same reason as nanites only more so. Enzymes are very specific in their actions so a simple chance in hull composition would neutralise them. They also need a very specific environment and heat range in which to work, i.e. not the PDS battlespace! Rampent Kitty-basher
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/10...ang0gu.gif |
|
|
|
| Norsehound |
Posted on 29-09-2005 20:12
|
|
Posts: 26 Joined: September 07 2005 |
Cataclysm is loosely accepted here in PDS. While we agree that Somtaaw hull designs became nearly standard in the years following the 'beast wars', we (at least I) frown on the idea of the beast, and the energy cannon (the energy sphere ordinance of cata). My position is against nanotechnological weapons for the same reason as the beast and the borg. On the outside it seems like some magical property that puts this on the brink of Fantasy. True, there could be volumes of explaination as to how the nanites work, but personally I feel like it takes away something from the Sci-fi genre. That said, the discussion appears to be turning to purely biological based weapons. Have acidic payloads been considered for some weapons? A warhead with such a payload could bypass the shields and deal direct damage to the hull after an impact. By no means such an ordinance would become standard... as the cost to manufacture an acidic warhead would not be justifyable to replace a plasma bolt or solid kinetic round. Just a thought. Edited by Norsehound on 29-09-2005 20:13 Resigned.
|
|
|
|
| Fu |
Posted on 29-09-2005 23:05
|
 Posts: 34 Joined: September 04 2005 |
I think with regard to chemical reactions on ship hulls - not only will a ship's hull be heated by nearby stellar bodies, but also any internal systems (life support, Weapon cooling systems) and even energy weapon impacts - to a lesser extent. The hull will be cold, but nowhere near 3K. Same applies to any missile payloads - rocket thruster will heat the entire munition. Food for thought - bear in mind that unless you are very lucky, your acid is going to change into non-acidic products, meaning that any subsequent hits are going to have to eat through whatever residue is left. And lastly, will chemical weaponry make a large difference in the time taken to destroy (or disable) a ship? Edited by Fu on 29-09-2005 23:11 "But trust is the color of a dark seed growing, Trust is the color of a hearts blood flowing, Trust is the color of a souls last breath, Trust is the color of death." -Robert Jordan , Wheel of Time |
|
|
|
| Inert |
Posted on 29-09-2005 23:27
|
|
Posts: 388 Joined: September 08 2005 |
Chemical enzymes do not make productive weapon systems. The hull, while not near 3K, is still on the outside. Nor is it 3K when you're in a reasonable vicinity of radiation. However, to be frank, you're not fighting directly next to a star. Space is space, and it is cold. You won't be active clinging onto the outside of a ship hull, regardless of inside temperature. It's liking clinging to a heater in the artic circle when it's 100 degrees (F) below. Chemical payloads will not make much a difference, as I mentioned. Exposing something as fragile as liquid in space will make it condense and render it useless. Acid is effective, but it takes time to eat armour. And when your opportunity window is between 10 and 50 nanoseconds, you're not going to get a whole lot of results. |
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 30-09-2005 01:08
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
Quote True, there could be volumes of explaination as to how the nanites work, but personally I feel like it takes away something from the Sci-fi genre. I think this statement sums up the entire discussion, especially where we have gameplay aesthetics to consider. A nanotech war isn't going to be very conducive. However, as stated before, it is the intent of this thread to explore the limits of nanotechnology, be it in weapons, manufacturing, or any other use you can think of. I also notice a lot of focus is put into space to space weaponry, while smaller scale (and thus more viable for a first attempt) nanotech weapon applications like door breaching and industrial sabotage are simply, not discussed at all. You are now obliged to do so. |
|
|
|
| MDD |
Posted on 30-09-2005 01:47
|
|
Posts: 32 Joined: September 26 2005 |
Let my clarify what i mean when i say viruses can't self propogate. Viruses are incapable of reproducing without the aid of another organism. They are parasites. Viruses propagate by injecting their malicious RNA strand into the soma( cell body) of a host cell. The RNA then makes its way to the nucleus and highjacks the host cells reproductive capability by altering the function of the cell so that it uses its own "machinery" to assemble more viruses. After a short time, the host cell explodes relaeasing the new virus into the environment. The reason that viruses can change is that DNA transcription is not a completely accurate process (likely the reason for much of the redundant genatic material). It's messy, so often the DNA of the host cell is incorporated into the new viuses RNA. Sort of an ad-hoc method of evolution. |
|
|
|
| Jump to Forum |