Help me come up with shock effect preventing technology (sci-fi book)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a technological challenge in a narrative set on an ocean planet where combat occurs underwater due to the dangers of being above sea level. The primary issue is the use of sea mines and the need for technology to mitigate their shock effects. One proposed solution involves enveloping the mines in a large air bubble to reduce the energy transfer upon detonation, with suggestions for a bubble diameter of three to four times that of the mine. This would require a specialized craft or drone capable of pressurizing air and creating the bubble underwater. An alternative approach discussed includes developing anti-explosive munitions from materials sourced underwater, enhancing the worldbuilding aspect. Additionally, the idea of background radiation from past conflicts is suggested as a narrative device to explain the underwater setting's dynamics. The conversation concludes with a note that the original poster has not been active recently, indicating the thread is effectively closed.
Antitank_Borshch
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
There is a problem in my technological concept that does not allow the normal development of the plot of the book. It takes place on an ocean planet where being above sea level is absolutely dangerous with the level of technology that exists there. So all combat operations there take place underwater, which automatically means the active use of sea mines. And I have trouble coming up with technology that can prevent the shock effect of them. And if it is not there, then the big question is why, with such an alignment as I describe in the book, people still exist there, and not just a pile of debris with corpses inside.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sea mine means a naval mine, not a mine on the bottom of the sea
 
It seems like if the mine could be enveloped by a large air bubble and the mine detonated, that its coupling of its energy to the water would be diminished. I don't know how large of a bubble would give what diminishing effect, but perhaps you can do some Google searching to see if it's been studied or modeled before. Hopefully something like a bubble diameter of 3-4X the diameter of the mine would give a large dampening effect.

If it could work, then you need to figure out a way to have a craft/drone that pressurizes air tanks at the surface, then submerges and approaches a mine from below. It somehow blows the bubble (maybe with some chemicals to increase the surface tension to hold the bubble together, and releases it with some detonator thing at the bottom/middle of the bubble...
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes phinds, hmmm27 and Antitank_Borshch
berkeman said:
It seems like if the mine could be enveloped by a large air bubble and the mine detonated, that its coupling of its energy to the water would be diminished. I don't know how large of a bubble would give what diminishing effect, but perhaps you can do some Google searching to see if it's been studied or modeled before. Hopefully something like a bubble diameter of 3-4X the diameter of the mine would give a large dampening effect.

If it could work, then you need to figure out a way to have a craft/drone that pressurizes air tanks at the surface, then submerges and approaches a mine from below. It somehow blows the bubble (maybe with some chemicals to increase the surface tension to hold the bubble together, and releases it with some detonator thing at the bottom/middle of the bubble...
Thanks for the informative reply. I like the idea of covering the mine with a substance that will dampen the shock effect of it, but floating to the surface of the ocean with such frequency and on such a scale is almost impossible due to the high density of the atmosphere, and therefore the extreme weather conditions that rage there. Because of this, I'm leaning more toward crafting special anti-explosive munitions in the form of capsules with a substance produced/mined underwater. And it will make the worldbuilding a lot more interesting and layered, so thanks again man.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Have you considered enhanced background radiation. I mean as another explanation for keeping things happening underwater? Perhaps due to some ancient conflict? I don't think nuclear weapons are the most effective EMPs, but who knows what people do when they have access to WMDs.

I have a couple of ideas but the less said the better. :P
 
OP last seen in February, so no need to spin our wheels anymore here. Thread closed.
 
We've just had an interesting thread about generation ships, but I don't think that that is the most reasonable way to colonize another planet. Fatal problems: - Crew may become chaotic and self destructive. - Crew may become so adapted to space as to be unwilling to return to a planet. - Making the planet habitable may take longer then the trip, so the ship needs to last far longer than just the journey. - Mid-flight malfunction may render the ship unable to decelerate at the destination...
I know this topic is extremely contraversial and debated, but I'm writing a book where an AI attempts to become as human as possible. Would it, eventually, especially in the far future, be possible for an AI to gain a conscious? To be clear, my definition of a consciousness being the ability to possess self-created morals, thoughts, and views, AKA a whole personality. And if this is possible (and let's just say it is for this question), about how long may it take for something to happen...
This is a question for people who know about astrophysics. It's been said that the habitable zones around red dwarf stars are so close to those stars that any planets in the zones would be tidally locked to the stars in question. With one side roasting and another side freezing almost forever, those planets wouldn't be hospitable to life. a) Could there be forms of life--whole ecologies--that first evolve in the planet's twilight zone and then extend their habitat by burrowing...
Back
Top