Can a Death Star weapon actually be built?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lucas_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Death Star
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of constructing a weapon similar to the Death Star from Star Wars, exploring theoretical power sources and methods of destruction. Participants consider various scientific principles, speculative technologies, and the implications of such a weapon on planetary systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the energy required to destroy a planet, as depicted in Star Wars, is unimaginably large and may not be feasible with current understanding of physics.
  • One participant proposes using gamma-ray bursts as a natural phenomenon that could theoretically wipe out a planet's ozone layer, questioning if advanced civilizations could manipulate such events.
  • Another participant discusses the potential of diverting asteroids as a more practical method of destruction, emphasizing that it would require significantly less energy than a Death Star-like weapon.
  • There are claims regarding the energy needed to eject planetary material, with calculations comparing it to the energy content of TNT, suggesting that the estimates for destruction may be overly simplistic.
  • Some participants argue about the portrayal of destruction in the Star Wars films, debating the mechanics of how a planet could be destroyed and the implications of such an event.
  • Speculative ideas are presented about the power sources for a Death Star, including concepts of higher-dimensional energy extraction, although these remain firmly in the realm of science fiction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the feasibility of building a Death Star or the methods of destruction discussed. Disagreements arise regarding the interpretation of the film's events and the scientific principles involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the limitations of applying real-world physics to the fictional technology of Star Wars, highlighting the differences between cinematic representation and scientific reality.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may interest fans of science fiction, those curious about theoretical physics, and individuals exploring the intersection of technology and speculative concepts in popular media.

  • #31
jbriggs444 said:
Vacuum engineering. Gotta be Space Balls: "She's gone from suck to blow".
See, now I'm really upset because I made a Spaceballs reference in a thread about time recently and it (the thread) got deleted. It was a really good one, too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
lucas_ said:
Remember the events in Star Wars occurred a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, maybe even in a parallel universe.

They might have gotten hold of one of the Infinity Stones. Which of the stones can be suited to be integrated in the Death Star to inflict the damage it does?

Before Earth even existed. Where and what happened to the Infinity Stones (these were a product of the Big Bang itself).
If you haven’t seen it, this is the best 9 minutes you’ll spend today:
 
  • #33
Vanadium 50 said:
If that's the kind of answer you'll accept, it's hard to see what the purpose of the thread is.

I'm with you there! We're wobbling all over the place, mixing fictional universes for no obvious reason, and not really concluding anything. It's fun to flex your imagination muscles from time to time, but this is not physics as we know it, Jim.
 
  • #34
While I agree with @Vanadium 50 and @Tghu Verd concerning consistency, the OP exists within these conflicting technological fantasies.

As a Sci-Fi buff I missed the original Star Wars craze while working overseas. Sure noticed it when I returned. When I finally watched the original movie I was struck by Alec Guinness's reluctant performance as old Obi Wan Kenobi. Lucas would have done the SF world a favor by allowing the master actor to ad-lib and improvise his lines as Guinness did for many great characters.

1566146142560.png
 
  • #35
If I proposed the Death Star is powered by magic, I'd be deluged with "everybody knows there's no such thing as magic". But I replace "magic" with "infinity stones", now suddenly everything's OK. :confused:
 
  • #36
Vanadium 50 said:
If I proposed the Death Star is powered by magic, I'd be deluged with "everybody knows there's no such thing as magic". But I replace "magic" with "infinity stones", now suddenly everything's OK. :confused:
I get the irony, but it's not as illogical as all that.

"Infinity stones" are a reference to an acknowledged fiction - the MCU.

"Magic" has no such implicit reference (or too many), and thus it is ambiguous as to whether you mean it as a fictional canon, or if you actually believe it.By rights, instead of being deluged with "everybody knows there's no such thing as magic", thoughtful readers should instead be deluging you with "to which universe's magic do you refer? Vader's? Potter's? Gandalf's? Highlander's? "
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
  • #37
lucas_ said:
[...snip]
Speaking of conventional. I reviewed the concept of laser like lasing, what is the maximum megawatts a laser source like death star can give? And what manner of lasing can produce big size laser beams. What lasing source do they use in the navy?
Real world answers would be classified data but the upper limit on laser power output probably occurs when your apparatus melts or vaporizes. The movie "Real Genius" describes a single-shot chemical laser and a rotating mirror on gimbals necessary to direct the laser beam and protect the optics from meltdown.

The film climaxes in a laser shot from the upper atmosphere at a rotating prism that distributes the heat to cook popcorn instead of blasting a military convoy. The laser destroys itself but not the aircraft that carries it aloft.
 
  • #38
DaveC426913 said:
thoughtful readers should instead be deluging you with "to which universe's magic do you refer? Vader's? Potter's? Gandalf's? Highlander's? "

Clearly the Evil Stepmother, given that like Star Wars (and Infinity Stones) it's a Disney property.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveC426913
  • #39
Klystron said:
Real world answers would be classified data but the upper limit on laser power output probably occurs when your apparatus melts or vaporizes. The movie "Real Genius" describes a single-shot chemical laser and a rotating mirror on gimbals necessary to direct the laser beam and protect the optics from meltdown.

The film climaxes in a laser shot from the upper atmosphere at a rotating prism that distributes the heat to cook popcorn instead of blasting a military convoy. The laser destroys itself but not the aircraft that carries it aloft.

Oh yes. I will watch Real Genius again tonight.

Infinity stones and Death Star rays were so ingrained deep in the subconscious of the public because many legends spoke of them. For example. Edgar Cayce described big crystals with death ray that destroyed the civilization of Atlantis. In fact, the Bible started right after the destruction (the Flood) with Pyramids already existing. It didn't mention how the Pyramids were built for example.

Just for fuller historical and mythical context.
 
  • #40
lucas_ said:
Infinity stones and Death Star rays were so ingrained deep in the subconscious of the public because many legends spoke of them.
Er. What?

I guess you're talking about post Star Wars and post-MCU millennials?

lucas_ said:
For example. Edgar Cayce described big crystals with death ray that destroyed the civilization of Atlantis.
Is this Edgar guy a mythical figure who has become ingrained in our subconscious?

lucas_ said:
In fact, the Bible started right after the destruction (the Flood) with Pyramids already existing. It didn't mention how the Pyramids were built for example.
So ... the pyramids were built by a Grand Moff Tarkin/Thanos team-up?
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
  • #41
Closed for moderation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: member 656954

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K