NationStates Jolt Archive

I doubt that I will ever have occasion to use it, but in case I do, I want to know everyone's opinions on the following technologies.

Antigrav and gravitic manipulation are pretty much universally accepted, at least among the future-tech crowd. But few people really use it for anything interesting. They just want stuff to float. I don't like that. Any military scientist worth his weight in salt would recognize the tactical advantages gravity manipulation could give.

Cool tech #1- The Gravity Shield
Beyond simply levitating you, this would create a gravitational spike "under" (in a fifth-dimensional sense) the ship, equivalent in amplitude to whatever well it was in, allowing the ship to move as if there was no planet/moon/whatever present.
The upside- anything fired at your ship would have to be moving above escape velocity to hit it (hence the name Gravity Shield), and maneuverability would be mind-boggling.
The downside- In freespace, without any major natural gravitational fields, it would be reduced to the capabilities of a normal gravydrive, or might not work at all if you use a gravity wave blocker instead of an artificial gravity wave generator- unless you had it act on the sun's well. Also, you would have to actively move to keep up with the curve of the ground and the spin of a planet during surface, atmospheric, or orbital operations.

Cool tech #2- The Gravy Mirror
Real-life antigrav research seems to indicate that the simplest for of antigravity is a gravity wave blocker, also mentioned above, something that just stops gravity waves from reaching objects above it, thereby reducing their weight. This could take multiple forms- something that absorbs the waves, or refracts them, or something that reflects them. Scolo already has a 'gravy gun' that introduces incredible stresses on an enemy craft. The Gravy Mirror would be a step above, designed to attack larger targets. Much larger targets. Say, taking apart a planet by refleting it's own gravity back on it, thereby making a large section of it's crust weight next to nothing becuase of the gravitational forces pulling in opposite directions. Huge chunk of planet thrown into space by centrifugal force, mnatle boils out, further crust collapses... you get the idea. Or maybe doing the same to a star, removing a huge chunk of plasma on a course for your enemy.
The upside- Things other than the craft itself can be levitated and otherwise manipulated below and to the side of the AG device as well as above it, and big things can be taken care of with very little energy expenditure.
The downside- Power is directly related to the strength of the natural gravitational field it's operating in.

There are many more I could point out, but those are the two I'm most worried about right now.

We (TYCS) employ gravy-tech in a multitude of applications beyond the floaty bit.

Well, Triumvirate is always the exception. But do you think people would be too upset by a weapon that could literally wipe an entire continent off of the face of a planet? (Especially considering all of the other cool stuff I've already got, most of it not public....) Ok, I guess that's a stupid question, but answer it anyway.

Xanthalian starships use their GMSs (Gravity Manipulation Systems) to do many things, from making them more nimble to FTL travel (not used much for that anymore) to blocking enemy missile attacks to damaging or hindering enemy ships to manipulating objects on the stellar scale. Mastering gravity is infinately useful, and the Xanthalians are self-proclaimed masters of it, they've been using it for over one thousand years.

But how does gravitic technology work in the first place?

Seriously.

But how does gravitic technology work in the first place?

Seriously.
Depends on who you ask. The version I employ IC (publicly, at least), and upon which the two technologies described above are based, involves using high-charged superconducting discs with rotating electrical charges to block or reduce the magnitude of gravitational waves. Why it works, nobody knows IRL, but there is experimental data to show that it does. Or, at the least, it appears to. There are also various Townsend-Brown electrokinetic devices (used IC as reationless thrusters), which are basically high-powered assymetrical capacitors, which have definitely been shown to work IRL, but no one knows exactly why, or even if it's really gravity manipulation or something else entirely.

Then there's the much more speculative method of using radio interference or rotating electrical charges to manipulate atomic spin. Supposedly, if a large number of heavy atoms are oriented in the same direction, they produce a negative gravitational force in that direction. While the Hutchison Effect is proof that radio interference can be used to impart kinetic forces on objects at a distance, that is most likely not the result of gravitational manipulation, and RL experiments with this method have generated very few repeatable results, and it's generally (as far as I know) regarded to be one of the more far-fetched ideas, although some do take it seriously.

In sci-fi, the big thing for gravity manipulation is artifical production/placement of graviton particles, mainly becuase that would allow things like linear gravity generators (think artificial shipboard gravity) and gravy drives independant of external fields. While there is evidence that such particles may actually exists (if I remember my sources correctly), isolating them let alone manipulating them en masse, is a very far-future thing, and there is no experimental data on this method.

I think those are the big ones. If there are any more, somebody tell me.

But do you think people would be too upset by a weapon that could literally wipe an entire continent off of the face of a planet? (Especially considering all of the other cool stuff I've already got, most of it not public....) Ok, I guess that's a stupid question, but answer it anyway.
Well... just because one has the capability doesn't mean one uses it. Also, it requires a frame of reference. Xanthal, for example, can blow up entire star systems and has intergalactic UberSooperDooperDrives. Foe Hammer can apparently go at ninety degrees to reality. On the other hand, many others are limited to kiloton or low-megaton nuclear weaponry and limited (if any) space travel.

I could technically jump a majillon kizillion light years, but the computation and error would be immense... and, yes, I'm actually pondering making a function where jump error becomes rather noticable after a few hundred leeches.

Bleah... where was I going with this? Um... oh yeah.

First: Is there a real military need to wipe out entire continents? Remember that precision is one of the major components of modern warfare. Destroying targets X, Y, and Z is generally preferable to annihilating region W that the targets reside in... so there generally is no need for a weapon of this scope.

Second: Is it feasible? Given Eniqciri tech, probably.

Third: Is it any fun? Does it actually assist plotlines any, or will make for good stories? If it's 'press button and Arda is waporized' then I severely doubt it.

In short, while it may be nifty, it may not actually be a good idea. Chance to be classified as a godmoder is high, while story opportunities are relatively low. Just a cost-benefit analysis.

Just to continue on what Scolo was saying, these techs could be used on a rather smaller scale to be interesting. Although computation would need to be extremely good, thereby restricting the actual range of the weapon to a small area, said weapons could be shrunk as precision defenses. From being able to fire a beam at an incoming missiles engine, and thereby moving out of your path, and doing the same to mines, those types of weapons could be used to destroy fighters that come too close. Furthmore, if you wanted something, in my mind, really cool, you could have a kind of suicide ship. Acting basically as a huge grav mine, you could just fill the ship with various electro-grav drives and reactors, and send it into the middle of a battle, activate everything, and just let loose a halo of gravitational disturbances. Nasty.

And yes, that would be kick ass in well done RP.

I don't think it's a good idea to tinker with gravity itself, since the only way I'm aware of to override gravity is to use a stronger universal force (in the examples I've seen so far, electromagnetics). When you start talking about SIGNIFICANT gravitic distortions, you're also going to have to consider the amount of damage that distortion is going to do to the generator, as well as the reciever; you can't have your cake and eat it too. Erecting a tremendous gravitic field around a ship is just as likely to pull it apart from the inside out as it is to deflect bullets... And if you're using the ship as the source for the gravity well (a la gravimetric singularity), you're just going to accelerate the particles INTO your ship, not AWAY from it.
Like I said, I don't think it's a good idea to play with the actual force of gravity, but if you think you can explain it to the point where it's plausible, have at it; I'm not here to be a physics Nazi, just to put things in perspective. Then again, I'm still learning my applied physics, so I could be wrong somewhere along the line. ;)

EDIT: More posts while I typed. The following is in response to Scolo:

Eh, yeah. As I said, I probably will never be in a position where I'll need to use either technology. If it is ever employed IC, most likely it'll be for intimidation purposes.

Chance to be considered godmoddy is what I'm really worried about, especially given where I'll be taking this nation in the near future. I'm trying to keep consistent, which pretty much means developing as far as possible every technology that can be extrapolated from what I already have and still be at least close to the realm of physical possibility. (What else can you do when one of the headings in the Techneugists Handbook is "I swear never to Agree to Not Develop Any Specific Technology, lest if be used against me"?) In planning out my future RPs, I've come across some glaring omissions from the techbase I should have already, so I"ll be trying to fill those in as best as I can, which means lots of new stuff coming out very quickly. Which leaves lot's of room for godmodding if I'm not careful.

With the Gravy Mirror tech, all I'm looking for is acknowledgement that it can exist IC, even though I never plan to use it in a Big Bad way, just for internal consistency purposes and so that it can be used for intimidation purposes. Everybody knows that underhanded deals and blackmail diplomacy is far more fun than just wiping somebody off the map anyway. That way I can use it to advance plotlines, even though the stories where it's used might be very sparse, and it certainly won't be 'press button and Arda is waporized'.

I suppose I'm trying to say this: Can the capabilities be accepted, if not the use of them?

Oh, and as for jumping a majillon kizillion light years- you're not alone. But you knew that. Hm. Gives me another point to make. Jump error compounding with distance is practically a given limitation of FTL jump drives of all kinds. What are some other kinds of "universal limiters" for staple sci-fi technologies? Maybe I can come up with more than just diplomatic downsides to balance mine technological uberness.

said weapons could be shrunk as precision defenses. From being able to fire a beam at an incoming missiles engine, and thereby moving out of your path, and doing the same to mines, those types of weapons could be used to destroy fighters that come too close.
True, but I've already got a solution for that. Hutchison Point Deflectors, which have recently excited some debate in the Mars Wars, which is part of the reason I'm getting opinions on this before going ahead with it.

Okay... other possible limitations that sound good but may or may not have any basis in reality:

1) Sheer power output. Put out too much energy, and space simply cannot take it anymore. This would be near limitless in the case of traditional EM (even if you pass the permittivity of vacuum, you just turn space itself into a conductor... which, actually, would be pretty bad with all that shorting-out mad-interference oops-I-fuxz0r3d-my-ship effect). With gravy weapons, put out too much distortion and the fabric of spacetime itself rips. I dunno what that would do but it probably isn't good.

2) Take the Principle of Spite and Lenz's Law to their logical extreme. The harder one pushes something, the harder it pushes back. The more current you attempt to induce, the more back-EMF is generated to attempt to bring the system back to equilibrium. Just say that "I can't build bigger than this because the universe pushes back too hard afterwards."

3) The simplest: Energy. "I would do that but it would require me to tap into a power source of such density and exergy that I would have to have a profitable connection to an alternate dimension made entirely of extremely low-entropy energy... and even Xanthal or Foe Hammer or Mishakal doesn't have that." Please oh please don't look at my website... I absolutely promise the WZ will never show up in the NS universe except as maybe an April Fools' gag...

Just some ideas I'm throwing out with no research whatsoever.

http://wwwai.wu-wien.ac.at/Startrek/gifs/Personen/chekov-small.gif
"Arda waporized, Keptin!"

Nothing wrong with continent-shattering weapons in principle, since you can accomplish something like that with more normal tech as well. Or at least I can. :twisted:

Also, I've been playing with those Menelmacari gravitics I got a while ago, and I've come up with some great weapons that I will use as an alternative, when or if someone decides to be immune to my realistic weapons.

OOC:
One of the things that few people seem to think of is using antigravity technology to launch space stuff. They use it happily on individual vessels, but what about fixed launch platforms? Just put the payload on top of the antigravity tech and float it into orbit.

Uh, Roseway does not use antimatter much. We never could find a cheap way, and a lot of our commanders think it's dishonorable for some reason.

I think both sides of grav tech needs to be represented here.

There are the butt loads of possibilities, but there are also a bunch fundamental misunderstandings (I think....could just be me :? ) that are never addressed.

For example, the usage of grav tech within a large grav field......say that of a planet. For me, its logical that it would take more energy to operate grav tech within an area of heavy gravity influence - since one has to overcome the existing field before the desired effects can be made noticable.

My biggest beef is in the area of so called "gravity sensors", detection systems based on sensing grativic influences of different masses in the area....or something to that effect. Most people would claim that raw computational power would be able to handle whatever adjustments that need to be made. I say differently, think of it this way - imagine trying to listen to a lone violinist playing solo to Beethoven's Sonata in G........during a heavy metal concert....in a mosh pit, and you're 2 miles away. Simple put, you're never gonna hear the guy. No amount of "phase shifting", "sound wave filtration", or whatever else you can come up with is going to make that violin any louder or any clearer.....or allow you to hear it at all.

Then come gravtech starships. I have no problem with grav tech being used on ships at all, don't get me wrong but......when big (meaning really big) ships start flying around "in randomly changing patterns", "swirling clouds", or generally maneuvering in such a fashion unbeffitting of lumbering vessels of doom that they are, I begin to get that eyebrow twitch. Its great that you have a <insert a capital ship size here> vessel that "has" the capability to turn on a dime whilst going at "c-fractional" speeds............to bad that it would tear itself apart due to shear forces if you ever tried it. Sadly enough this superiority without grounds has already been accepted by the general NS community. So when people RP big, lumbering "targets" as spacecraft, they always will get creamed - despite having a better (more reasonable) tech base.

I also have problems with antimatter - apparently the save all energy source for everyone in space. From my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) matter and antimatter exist in equal amounts - basically the universes version of ying and yang, cancelling each other out. Fine, but where do you get said "antimatter"? It doesn't exist in a nice mine somewhere to dig out with a shovel. Then there's the matter of storing it (not a pun). It's antimatter, which means if it touches matter, there's a pure energy conversion (or something like that)......kinda makes it hard to stick it in your duffle bag and walk around with.

I have alot more....but I realize that I'm really just ranting again, so I'll leave it at that. My two cents.

...have a profitable connection to an alternate dimension made entirely of extremely low-entropy energy... and even Xanthal... doesn't have that...Um... We do, actually. Sort of. That's how we power our ships. A core draws energy from a dimension of pure energy. It's really useful because we no longer have to have access to nebulas to refuel our ships. That's about the only advantage though, it's not super energy or anything unless it overloads, but that destroys the ship it's installed on.

When it comes to FTL travel, I just scream hyperspace and run the other way before the science buffs can tar and feather me.

...have a profitable connection to an alternate dimension made entirely of extremely low-entropy energy... and even Xanthal... doesn't have that...Um... We do, actually. Sort of. That's how we power our ships. A core draws energy from a dimension of pure energy. It's really useful because we no longer have to have access to nebulas to refuel our ships. That's about the only advantage though, it's not super energy or anything unless it overloads, but that destroys the ship it's installed on.
*smacks his forehead*

I'm still sticking to my guns and using low tech versions of "Home World" space technology... no Ion guns, no FTL drive, no Mothership (though a low tech space station takes it's place) and no super heavy capitol ships... just the basics.

For now...

1) Sheer power output. Put out too much energy, and space simply cannot take it anymore. This would be near limitless in the case of traditional EM (even if you pass the permittivity of vacuum, you just turn space itself into a conductor... which, actually, would be pretty bad with all that shorting-out mad-interference oops-I-fuxz0r3d-my-ship effect). With gravy weapons, put out too much distortion and the fabric of spacetime itself rips. I dunno what that would do but it probably isn't good.
Seems like the beginnings of a Visser Wormhole Generator, or Hyperline drive....

2) Take the Principle of Spite and Lenz's Law to their logical extreme. The harder one pushes something, the harder it pushes back. The more current you attempt to induce, the more back-EMF is generated to attempt to bring the system back to equilibrium. Just say that "I can't build bigger than this because the universe pushes back too hard afterwards."
That could be good.... Ah! Have thought of something. That polish dude (yarg, can't recall name) used rotating discs. And one limitation on the tech I already use is that too much charge==self disintegration from electrostatic repulsion. So perhaps the bigness of a Mirror would be limited by centripetal force. 'Twould reduce them to only being able to carve out a mountain ata time. Still pretty big, and I'd probably have created some of those anyway just because they'd be far more useful than continent-destroying ones.

But what of the Shield?

Am going to have to agree with Sketch about the gravity sensors. RL gravity telescopes are several-kilometer-long affairs, and even future-tech ones would probably only work in a very controlled environment.

I have no idea how the subject of antimatter came up, but let's see what I have to say about it....

I also have problems with antimatter - apparently the save all energy source for everyone in space. From my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) matter and antimatter exist in equal amounts - basically the universes version of ying and yang, cancelling each other out. Fine, but where do you get said "antimatter"? It doesn't exist in a nice mine somewhere to dig out with a shovel. Then there's the matter of storing it (not a pun). It's antimatter, which means if it touches matter, there's a pure energy conversion (or something like that)......kinda makes it hard to stick it in your duffle bag and walk around with.
Matter and antimatter don't exist in equal amounts- if I remember correctly, antimatter particles decay into amtter particles after a sufficiently long time, or at least matter particles have a slightly higher chance of spontaneous generation- hence there being stuff left in the universe, and not having it all anihilated by mutual destruction at the beginning of the universe.
Antimatter can be created by smacking things together with sufficient energy, (in massively huge accelerators) via energy-to-matter conversion. But you then have to isolate the antiparticles from their corresponding particles before they destroy each other and revert to energy again. Storage is via magnetic confinement- but it could only be used as a battery, since you have to put in more energy to make it than can be extracted from it, not as a method of initial power generation.

Actually, you overestimate the power of gravity.

See this site: http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/BrainBugs.html and scroll to Gravitics.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

Actually, you overestimate the power of gravity.
Not so. Gravity may be the weakest of the Four Forces, but with a big enough generator (i.e., a planet, or even better, a singularity), you can get a very big effect. Like making it so difficult to fling something into space from the ground. The gravitic technologies I described aren't powerful because they exert a massive amount of force- they're powerful because they cancel or invert the relatively weak but oh-so important natural forces being applied to them.

Eniquir: antimatter just came up as a result of me going on a tangent; ranting about tech wanking in general. I just wanted to mention how everyone uses it as a highly effeicient energy source (ie. 100% efficient), when you have to put in more energy simply to produce and contain it then you will get out of it. Damn....I'm starting up again.... :wink:

Ahh, SW bashin ST. Can't say I don't appreciate it, but I fear this may degenerate into SW vs ST if I were to comment further......so I won't :P