42 replies to this topic

[Chyros]

Golan, on 19 Jun 2010, 12:56, said:

Chyros, on 18 Jun 2010, 21:39, said:

The article is in horrendous overstatement. It's not "the most powerful laser ever" by a landslide, it's just the only one of this calibre ever made that's meant as a laser pointer. Ordinary laser cutters are in the kW range and analytical lasers generally are in the megawatt range for the analysis of only a little bit of sample, and often using much more energetic radiation than visible light too. USEXAS analysis uses terawatt lasers. A watt-range laser will not burn anything off you like a lightsaber will in a lifetime, it will hardly even warm your coffee. It's about as much energy as generated by an average LED lamp.

If you try to cut holes with this or even kill someone, you will be in for a massive disappointment.

A 1W laser is Class IV and has already enough power to burn trough plastic and cause serious permanent damage to skin and eyes even from diffuse reflections on some materials. While the power is low compared to other light sources, the power density is extremely high; passing through the eye's lens will also increase power density by about 10^5 due to the beam getting focused immensely.
While it's not possible to cut anything with this laser like a LightSabre would, it is incredibly dangerous especially when wielded by people who think it's too weak to do any serious damage.

It will blind you. That's about it. That's dangerous enough by itself, true, but don't overstate the situation. It will not burn through plastic at an excitingly quick rate, and not through all plastics in the first place, only thermoplasts.

[Golan]

How could I have overstated if you proceed to say the exact same thing as me?

Also, many people would count permanent scaring of the retina as damn dangerous and horrible.

Edited by Golan, 21 June 2010 - 12:13.

[Chyros]

You say it burns through plastic, I said you're overreacting. You said it'll cause serious permanent damage to your skin, I'm saying that's a bit much. You'd have to tie someone down and keep the laser pretty much fixed on that exact same spot all the time. If you put out a cigarette on someone you're a lot more efficient. How is that saying the exact same thing you said?

And damaging the retina can be done in a zillion ways, for example with a knife. I agree, a knife is very dangerous too at times, but it's not as if something else couldn't achieve the same. This laser that's being advertised is nothing special at all, the only special thing is it hasn't been outlawed yet due to how easy it is to blind someone with it, not how radical the effect is.

[Golan]

I merely stated it has enough power to do so, not that it does in the blink of an eye.

Well then again, damaging the eye is what happens in less than the blink of an eye over a distance of a couple hundred meters, so it's probably a bit more dangerous thana knife in that regard if you have someone going pew-pew with it. Let's just ban everything, it's safest.

[partyzanpaulzy]

Why something so stupid like Lightsaber when you can have knives from really solid steel, far denser than Damascus steel, probably even better than steel of legendary Medieval swords (RL Excalibur, sword of El Cid, etc.). Normal steel is like a sponge on microscopic level, so imagine what really solid steel would be capable of... plus why should we limit on steel when there are much better materials like titanium, various alloys, carbides or composites.

Near-future Special Forces Trooper will be probably equiped with small rapid rail-/coilgun rifle (I am sure there are first prototypes), silencer or arbalest, pair of composite daggers from hypermodern alloys with diamond-like edge and some smaller tools like C4.

Potential of laser rifle isn't very high, you can't use customisable bullets, micro-grenades neither guided bullets. On the other hand Special Forces would like them if they were silent.
And the Lightsaber is impossible to create with current knowledge.

[Chyros]

partyzanpaulzy, on 30 Jun 2010, 16:12, said:

Why something so stupid like Lightsaber when you can have knives from really solid steel, far denser than Damascus steel, probably even better than steel of legendary Medieval swords (RL Excalibur, sword of El Cid, etc.). Normal steel is like a sponge on microscopic level, so imagine what really solid steel would be capable of...

Everything is composed of almost nothing in fact . Besides, lighter materials like titanium etc. have their own disadvantages, such as having less force (with a constant amount of speed that is).

Edited by Chyros, 01 July 2010 - 17:00.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The cries for regulation disgust me. This is ludicrous. It is a one, count 'em, ONE watt laser. And it is a visible spectrum laser at that. You could easily build INFRARED lasers in excess of ONE HUNDRED-ONE THOUSAND if you pulse it-watts with a neon sign transformer and a vacuum pump. These can cut through STEEL.

[Chyros]

Dr. Strangelove, on 1 Jul 2010, 19:12, said:

The cries for regulation disgust me. This is ludicrous. It is a one, count 'em, ONE watt laser. And it is a visible spectrum laser at that. You could easily build INFRARED lasers in excess of ONE HUNDRED-ONE THOUSAND if you pulse it-watts with a neon sign transformer and a vacuum pump. These can cut through STEEL.

Infrared is less energetic than visible light so that doesn't impress me at all .

Besides, it's more the fact that it's highly portable and easy to get a hold of that's the big issue here. Steel cutting lasers are nothing special at all. Vaporising steel is a good start .

Edited by Chyros, 01 July 2010 - 18:25.

[deltaepsilon]

Lasers will keep it clean!

Or not.

[Sgt. Rho]

@Chyros: Ultriaviolet might be more powerful than IR, but IR is practically pure heat. Metals don't like heat.

Edited by Sargeant Rho, 02 July 2010 - 14:08.

[Chyros]

Sargeant Rho, on 2 Jul 2010, 16:05, said:

@Chyros: Ultriaviolet might be more powerful than IR, but IR is practically pure heat. Metals don't like heat.

That doesn't matter at all. UV is hotter than IR, and is more energetic. And UV isn't the limit either .

[Golan]

For a Laser, energy density is very important. As a photon's energy is defined by its frequency, shorter wavelengths can carry more energy. In short, the more energy you can pack into your pew-pew stuff, the higher is the chance of your pew-pew stuff doing hyper-quantum-magic on your pew-pew-targets instead of just lamely giving of heat.

[Chyros]

Isn't that exactly what I said?

[Golan]

We're a perfect couple.

And it was kinda tempting to talk about pew pew stuff.

*pew**pew*

*pew**pew**pew*

[partyzanpaulzy]

BTW, haven't soviets been developing X-ray laser, directly connected to the nuclear reactor? I mean in the 1980's, before collapse and official end of laser programs.


There was project called Polyus (1980's) where soviets were developing 50ton assault laser satelite and end of this project is shrouded in mystery (how strong reactor have they sent on the LEO, what was that remnant of Energia flying above our heads - was it really part of the MIR2?, etc.).


Another part of this research were AA lasers similar to American counterparts (starting in late 1970's):






However conventional weapons are still much more efficient than laser counterparts, like this Russian S-400 (also tests of the THEL were debacle, compared to normal AA cannons).


And don't forget on typical Russian strategy: doubletalk, doubletalk, doubletalk. In the end it's a question how much of this is true.

Edited by partyzanpaulzy, 03 July 2010 - 10:29.

[Chyros]

1)McCarthyism
2)X-ray lasers are quite common .

[GuardianTempest]

General Townes would have loved this for a desktop toy.

[n5p29]

umm... this one?