 |
 |
||||
|
|
||||
Lim Jyue (lim_jyue@pacific.net.sg)
Sun, 12 Nov 2000 05:38:19 +0800
At 06:52 11/10/2000 GMT, Jonathan Souza wrote:
>1)The hover/float system used by MS and ships is called Minovski Craft
>systems. The actual Minovski drive is something much, much more
>imporant....
Opps! Sorry, the V Gundam series is not familiar to me, as I have
yet to watch it. Turns out there's quite a bit of technical stuff in there...
>This is difficult to explain and I should work through the steps of how
>I think it happens.
>1)The Minovski Drive generates a particle with infinite density.
I think you mean an I-field with infinite density, but that's not
really possible, because if you increase the I-field beyond a certain
density (i.e., you compress the field into a small area) you release
mega-particles.. Which, in this case, could blast into the back of the
Minovsky Drive. Oppps. =)
You are not likely to generate a Minovsky particle with infinite
density, as this would mean that the reaction from which the particle comes
from is very high energy and ejects the particle at light speed (since the
rest mass of the Minovsky particle is near zero, it follows that in other to
get infinite weight at the same volume (and hence infinite density) you will
need to raise the velocity of the particle to light speed.
Since the reaction between He3 and H2 is limited in the energies it
can produced, this isn't very likely.. and even if it does happen, I doubt
it's a controlled reaction, and is thus ill-suited for such an application.
The only way I can see this being possible is if you had the above reaction,
and then channel the Minovsky particles into a magnetic mass-accelerator.
(Yes, I know what Mark had said about the workings.. still, a bit
strange.=)
Hmm. How do you direct a beam weapon then? By channeling the
mega-particles down an I-field tube?
>2)Plasma is used to push away from the particle-since the particle can't
>move(it has infinite density, remember? It's effectivly "fixed" in space),
>the plasma and what it's pushing is pushed away.
Aside from the fact that the particle, if it exist, would be moving
at or near light speed, this would be a problem too...
Since the particle has infinite density, and assume that it's size
doesn't change very much (otherwise we would be able to see it), the mass of
the particle will increase tremendously. This increase in mass would
generate a gravity pull o the surrounding, and with such a huge mass in such
a small particle, the effect may be very similar to that of a black hole --
i.e., instead of the MS moving away from the particle, the particle draws
the MS in and crush it like a tin can.
Interesting thought though. =)
>2)The I-Field. Big question, how the (bleep) does a beam-armed MS fire out
>of it's own I-Field?
Oh-ho! I think I answered my own question.
Mega-particles cannot penetrate an sufficiently dense I-field -- we
see that the beam slides off the field instead. As such, we can manipulate
an I-field to direct a mega-particle beam shot out from behind the barrier.
In essense, a targeting computer would generate the proper I-field
configuration in advance, and then plot a I-field tunnel in the barrier when
the shot is about to go out. That way, field integrity is assured, while you
still can fire.
This would, of course, meant that beam weaponry loses some of its
power while being aimed, but I guess that's better than the alternative --
an unaimed beam shot.
>1)The "tube" theory that the I-Field could be shot out of
The long tube, however, is still the most efficient and simplest
method to shoot out from behind a barrier, but is not always applicable.
>2)The "hole" theory that said the I-Field could have holes made in it to
>allow shots in or out. This was a popular theory.
Essentially this is the same idea I had, except that the I-field
holes are in fact tunnel-shaped I-fields instead of real holes. This is
because real holes could possibly compromise the integrity of the entire
barrier..
>3)The "propeller" theory was that the I-Field wasn't a continuous, solid
>object. Instead, it would "flicker" at a very rapid rate,
Well, possible, but that means a one-in-... oh, a thousand? shot
will go in, and the nasty implications of a flicker mistiming when you are
firing would mean bouncing mega-particle beam *within* your own barrier.
That got to hurt..
Very interesting theories -- let's have more! =)
-------------
Lim Jyue
ICQ: 24737555
I am careful not to confuse excellence with perfection.
Excellence I can reach for; perfection is God's business.
-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Nov 12 2000 - 06:23:36 JST