Gamma Ray Laser, possible? Superior Weapon?

[Snipez]

Hello there. I am wondering if anyone can shed some light on this topic. I am searching all over the Internet to find reliable sources on the possibility of gamma ray lasers. I know that it requires an atom that can be "pumped" without spontaneously emitting its energy so it can be triggered by stimulated emission to provide photons to lase.
Also I can't seem to find reliable solid physics on the factors associated with the melting and vaporisation depth of lasers. This is required to make my own decision about the gamma ray laser being a superior weapon as it will allow me to calculate what materials it can burn through and timings etc.

If anyone could offer any help that would be fantastic!

 

[Drakkith]

I don't think there is any way to make a gamma-ray laser at this time. Gamma rays are extremely high energy, typically thousands to millions of electron-volts per photon, compared with 1.5-3 electron-volts per photon for visible light. By the time you get to gamma-ray energy levels, you no longer have atoms in a gaseous or solid state, but in a plasma or near-plasma state.

Also, have you considered that gamma-rays can simply pass right through many materials without even doing damage to them? For example, your gamma-ray laser may pass right through your target and only have a few photons even hit the target. This would make it a very bad weapon.

 

[K^2]

Also, have you considered that gamma-rays can simply pass right through many materials without even doing damage to them? For example, your gamma-ray laser may pass right through your target and only have a few photons even hit the target. This would make it a very bad weapon.

Actually, that's what makes it a great weapon. Sure, only a small energy gets deposited, so it won't do any physical damage. But it will fry any electronics or persons it passes through, provided beam has enough power, and there is no way to stop it.

But, of course, that's also what makes it so difficult to make an actual laser. You need each photon to pass through a great length of lasing medium. That's typically achieved with mirrors. Know mirrors that work in gamma ranges? Me neither. Your other alternative is to have a very, very long lasing medium. That's possible, in principle, but now you need to pump that entire medium all at once.

There are sufficiently meta-stable states in nuclei to allow population inversion you need for lasing, but they don't live long. So you need to pump a very, very long rod of some material with hard gamma radiation all at once. Pretty much the only way to do this is to detonate a whole bunch of nuclear weapons along the length.

There have been some research done on this by US and Soviets during cold war. It wasn't a total failure, but a practical weapon was never produced by either side.

US has also done research on trying to pump the lasing medium with nuclear reactions along the length. That could have yielded a weapon. To the best of my knowledge, these experiments have failed.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Did you consider how difficult it could be to make the mirrors for each end of the laser?

 

[mfb]

There are X-ray lasers which use synchrotron radiation of electrons. I think the same concept could be used to generate higher photon energies, but I doubt that this would make a big difference.
They need big particle accelerators, so I doubt that they can be used as (mobile) weapon.

 

[K^2]

Military looked into use of undulators for production of high power x-ray beams. Requirement of a cyclotron to feed one of these, however, made the whole thing impractical.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Lasers are not very efficient (electrically powered lasers, that is) so a useful military laser needs to use a chemical energy source. The plane mounted one in the US was a chemical laser.
I think the same problem would exist for other, higher frequency weapons.

 

[ZapperZ]

The high-intense x-ray laser using accelerators are generated from FELs. There are already production of gamma rays using such a facility, but, this does not produce a "laser".

http://www.fel.duke.edu/papers/gamma_ray_production_1997.pdf

(Pssst! This is another area of application in Accelerator Physics!)

Zz.

 

[K^2]

Or you can simply have a power source that's several orders of magnitude better than chemical. Like nuclear, for example. They have built nuclear reactors that can be flown on an airplane. So that's not really a problem.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Or you can simply have a power source that's several orders of magnitude better than chemical. Like nuclear, for example. They have built nuclear reactors that can be flown on an airplane. So that's not really a problem.

If you have enough power to spare then, yes, why not? There are some details, though . . .
What about screening for the crew? You'd have the reactor at the end of the wings perhaps. What about crash risk? It's an interesting engineering problem. Do you have a reference?

 

[K^2]

What about screening for the crew? You'd have the reactor at the end of the wings perhaps. What about crash risk? It's an interesting engineering problem. Do you have a reference?

Pretty much the reasons I've heard for not using them. But a few experiments were done by both US and the Soviets. Most notable is the Crusader.

 

[Hetware]

Hello there. I am wondering if anyone can shed some light on this topic. I am searching all over the Internet to find reliable sources on the possibility of gamma ray lasers. I know that it requires an atom that can be "pumped" without spontaneously emitting its energy so it can be triggered by stimulated emission to provide photons to lase.
Also I can't seem to find reliable solid physics on the factors associated with the melting and vaporisation depth of lasers. This is required to make my own decision about the gamma ray laser being a superior weapon as it will allow me to calculate what materials it can burn through and timings etc.

If anyone could offer any help that would be fantastic!

Whom do you wish to kill with this hypothetical weapon, and why?

 

[Snipez]

"Whom do you wish to kill with this hypothetical weapon, and why?"

Now that would be telling! I would like to see a decent system in place to destroy nuclear missiles in the boost phase though, haha.

Does anyone have any idea/reference of how powerful a gamma ray laser beam would be? What would be the destructive power?

Would it burn a whole through a person? How fast would it burn through steel? I know basics found on a laser drilling website using latent heats of the different states but I can't find any decent physics to quote.

Very interesting comment about the mirror problem. But the same applies. What properties would the mirror need to be protected against the beam?

Also the range of the beam... Several factors effect this in current lasers. I know the Airborune Laser Testbed is being scrapped due to its inefficient range meaning that a Boeing 747 would have to be airborne behind enemy lines to be effective.

(reference for laser cutting rates http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~yarin/laser/physics.html)

 

[Drakkith]

I don't think you could burn a hole through anything with a gamma-ray laser. I would expect only a small portion of the energy would even be deposited into the target, and even then it would be spread out along the beam path through the target. Gamma-rays are simply too penetrating.

 

[Snipez]

I don't think you could burn a hole through anything with a gamma-ray laser. I would expect only a small portion of the energy would even be deposited into the target, and even then it would be spread out along the beam path through the target. Gamma-rays are simply too penetrating.

Interesting. So in terms of being a "Superior weapon", do you think it would have any uses?
Baring in mind the full range of wavelengths in the gamma ray region.

 

[Drakkith]

Interesting. So in terms of being a "Superior weapon", do you think it would have any uses?
Baring in mind the full range of wavelengths in the gamma ray region.

Gamma-rays striking the inner workings of the electronics of something could cause errors in the computations I believe.

 

[Snipez]

Gamma-rays striking the inner workings of the electronics of something could cause errors in the computations I believe.

Do you know the physics behind this? Or any reference material? That sounds interesting, but not something I am having ease searching for...
Forgive me if you find material on this after one search term in google, but I sure can't.

Also, thank you for your input. Greatly appreciated.

 

[Drakkith]

Not sure. See if this article helps. It explains radiation hardening of electronic components.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hardening

 

[Waterfox]

There's no advantage in using gamma rays to burn things, a 1kW visible/IR laser would be far more effective than a gamma ray laser of the same power for burning things.
The only uses I see are damaging radiation sensitive equipment as stated and giving people radiation induced illness..

I wonder though, is there any theoretical limit on the energies of a FEL? Could it produce a beam of the order of 100MeV?

 

[Snipez]

There's no advantage in using gamma rays to burn things, a 1kW visible/IR laser would be far more effective than a gamma ray laser of the same power for burning things.
The only uses I see are damaging radiation sensitive equipment as stated and giving people radiation induced illness..

I wonder though, is there any theoretical limit on the energies of a FEL? Could it produce a beam of the order of 100MeV?

Could pair production limit these high energy beams? Radiation induced illness would surely be deemed illegal as it has no combat effectiveness and huge ethical problems.
What would you use the 100MeV beam for? Maybe something fusion or imaging based?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Gamma-rays striking the inner workings of the electronics of something could cause errors in the computations I believe.

True, but you can also do this more easily by setting them on fire - the more traditional approach.

 

[Drakkith]

True, but you can also do this more easily by setting them on fire - the more traditional approach.

Exactly. I really don't see any benefit to using a gamma-ray laser over a visible light one.

 

[Snipez]

Exactly. I really don't see any benefit to using a gamma-ray laser over a visible light one.

The gamma ray laser could be used secretly. Penetrate through walls and disrupt data in computer systems. This would take a long time for diagnostic teams to work out =D.

 

[Drakkith]

The gamma ray laser could be used secretly. Penetrate through walls and disrupt data in computer systems. This would take a long time for diagnostic teams to work out =D.

I'd say that's a pretty unfeasible situation. I mean, the energy source required to even make a substantial source of gamma-rays MIGHT be vehicle portable. Plus whoever is doing this would have to be pretty lacking in empathy and whatnot, as you would be irradiating people at the same time most likely.

 

[Snipez]

I'd say that's a pretty unfeasible situation. I mean, the energy source required to even make a substantial source of gamma-rays MIGHT be vehicle portable. Plus whoever is doing this would have to be pretty lacking in empathy and whatnot, as you would be irradiating people at the same time most likely.

So in your opinion the military would never have a use for the gamma ray laser? The only uses would be in other areas of physics. Interesting, So much energy but no one to absorb it...

 

[Hetware]

"Whom do you wish to kill with this hypothetical weapon, and why?"

Now that would be telling! I would like to see a decent system in place to destroy nuclear missiles in the boost phase though, haha.

Does anyone have any idea/reference of how powerful a gamma ray laser beam would be? What would be the destructive power?

Would it burn a whole through a person? How fast would it burn through steel? I know basics found on a laser drilling website using latent heats of the different states but I can't find any decent physics to quote.

Very interesting comment about the mirror problem. But the same applies. What properties would the mirror need to be protected against the beam?

Also the range of the beam... Several factors effect this in current lasers. I know the Airborune Laser Testbed is being scrapped due to its inefficient range meaning that a Boeing 747 would have to be airborne behind enemy lines to be effective.

(reference for laser cutting rates http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~yarin/laser/physics.html)

Read Feynman's last lecture in Vol 1. Also find what Feynman had to say, in retrospect regarding the use of the atomic bomb, which he helped develop.

 

[d3mm]

Forgive me if you find material on this after one search term in google, but I sure can't.

Nice try, foreign spy.

There's a reason this information is not online.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The military uses of a gamma ray laser are probably far more horrific than specific. Given enough power and spread you could, in theory, inflict radiation sickness, higher probability of cancer and congenital diseases in offspring by pointing it at a populated area.

Then again if mass civilian causalities were your goal (and the state of war seems to be trending away from this) you could do better with gas, carpet bombing or even nuclear weapons.

 

[ZapperZ]

This is turning to not be a discussion on physics.

Unless there is an effort to bring this back to having actual physics content, this thread is done. All subsequent, non-physics post after this will be deleted.

Zz.

 

[Snipez]

This is turning to not be a discussion on physics.

Unless there is an effort to bring this back to having actual physics content, this thread is done. All subsequent, non-physics post after this will be deleted.

Zz.

Medical physics - Absorption rates of gamma rays. How would this be worked out? I'm guessing there is an absorption cross section. Also the area and flux is relevant.

Also, a question about the laser. When the light is coherent and in the same direction. Why is it that the waves don't superimpose each other? Or is it the fact that this does happen, but it is quite rare for a complete overlap so it is unnoticeable?

Sorry if I have a major flaw in my understanding but I am no laser expert =)!

 

[Snipez]

Nice try, foreign spy.

There's a reason this information is not online.

It is online. Found lots of information regarding current technologies leading in this field such as the free electron laser, the solid state and the chemical oxygen iodine laser. Specifics are more hidden though, usually behind subscription services - bypassed by academia log ins.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Back to Physics, Chaps!
Also, a question about the laser. When the light is coherent and in the same direction. Why is it that the waves don't superimpose each other? Or is it the fact that this does happen, but it is quite rare for a complete overlap so it is unnoticeable?

For coherent (laser) light, that's just what the waves from each emitting atom do. They are all in step because their emission has been stimulated by the wave that's already set up in the laser.

It always makes me smile because the output from a humble radio transmitter, transmitting a CW signal (continuous tone) is exactly the same and no one was ever overawed by the idea of the outputs from lots of vibrating charges (at a few MHz) being in phase for hours on end. But when it's light, they're astounded.

 

[Snipez]

For coherent (laser) light, that's just what the waves from each emitting atom do. They are all in step because their emission has been stimulated by the wave that's already set up in the laser.

It always makes me smile because the output from a humble radio transmitter, transmitting a CW signal (continuous tone) is exactly the same and no one was ever overawed by the idea of the outputs from lots of vibrating charges (at a few MHz) being in phase for hours on end. But when it's light, they're astounded.

I find it amazing that the stimulated change directs a photon in the same direction as the incident photon. How is this so? That is something I do find incredible, I'm guessing advanced statistics beyond the scope of this post =D?

 

[sophiecentaur]

It is online. Found lots of information regarding current technologies leading in this field such as the free electron laser, the solid state and the chemical oxygen iodine laser. Specifics are more hidden though, usually behind subscription services - bypassed by academia log ins.

Don't you guys expect for anything these days?

 

[Snipez]

Don't you guys expect for anything these days?

I do understand the wording of your statement. Sorry?

 

[sophiecentaur]

I do understand the wording of your statement. Sorry?

Woops - I meant to say "Don't you guys expect to pay for anything these days?" ( Sorry :Durr)

 

[sophiecentaur]

I find it amazing that the stimulated change directs a photon in the same direction as the incident photon. How is this so? That is something I do find incredible, I'm guessing advanced statistics beyond the scope of this post =D?

It would help if you avoided thinking that a little bullet (bad model of a photon) is shot out of an atom in a particular direction. All that happens is that the atom loses its energy to the passing wave because it has been stimulated to produce some energy that is coherent with the wave that's already there.

 

[d3mm]

It is online. Found lots of information regarding current technologies leading in this field such as the free electron laser, the solid state and the chemical oxygen iodine laser. Specifics are more hidden though, usually behind subscription services - bypassed by academia log ins.

Do you also believe Wikipedia tells you how to build a non-nuclear EMP weapon? How hard can it be to make a giant microwave? The answer is, they're still experimental after 20 or more years.

This thread touches on a lot of very "interesting" stuff in civil and military, for example, gamma ray shielding, which is an unsolved question important for long duration manned spaceflight.

SpaceX does not patent their spacerocket to prevent people reading the patent and copying it. Spacefligth stuff is protected by secrecy. Once you add military applications, it gets worse.

Someone who has worked in ths field (gamma ray weapons, and spaceship gamma shielding) is either going to remain silent or will *deliberately* provide credible sounding but false information, so you have to realize how speculative this thread is.

Addition: I'm not accusing people of writing false scientific papers, but the papers aren't the whole story.

 

[Enthalpy]

Random thoughts, corresponding to severals posts:

Free electron lasers operate in the soft X-rays up to now. If you put figures on them, it's very hard to go to the gamma with that method.

Lasers can operate without mirrors, in superradiant mode. Nitrogen lasers often do. No clean beam nor directivity.

A nuclear reactor needs a cold sink which limits the electric power to very little. A chemical source, for instance an airplane engine, can dump the heat with the exhaust gas.

Nuclear weapons have no relationship with missiles. The two last ones traveled by plane, present ones are mostly on cruise missiles (airplanes), the next ones may well travel in a cargo ship followed by an elevator. A serious defence would hence target the bombs, not missiles.

Electron orbitals cannot produce gamma rays because this is the definition of X-rays. Gammas require nucleus transitions.

As far as I ignore (a lot) X-ray lasers using deep electron transitions don't work, essentially because the surrounding matter is too opaque. Or you get rid of the matrix, have only lasing atoms which are then necessarily vaporized at each shot (even more so than for optical lasers) and have the proper source of power to invert the population. One old speculative description involved a tiny plutonium bomb surrounded by wires of heavy metal that lase in superradiant mode.

One laser using very soft nucleus transitions is to radiate in X energy. Seen the theoretical description 2 years (?) ago. This one would be reusable.

Some very limited gamma lasing effect has been observed using a beam of positrons impacting normal matter. I proposed elsewhere to sweep the beam impact at the speed of light so population inversion precedes shortly the light pulse. No idea if someone has tried.