What kind of fusion do you think Star Wars has?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of fusion power as depicted in the Star Wars universe, exploring its theoretical implications and the various types of fusion that could be employed. Participants examine the representation of fusion technology in the series, including its applications in vehicles and devices, while questioning the scientific accuracy and consistency of these representations.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that fusion power is frequently referenced in Star Wars, with examples like the A-wing and GNK droids serving as fusion batteries.
  • One participant suggests that the type of fusion used in Star Wars might not align with real-world definitions, proposing that it could involve exotic materials like dark matter.
  • Another participant speculates that the fusion technology could be a fictional variant, possibly involving non-thermal or thermal types depending on the application.
  • Concerns are raised about the scientific validity of discussing fusion in the context of Star Wars, with some arguing that it is more fantasy than science fiction.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the specifics of fusion reactors in Star Wars, with one suggesting that the Death Star might utilize a different form of energy altogether, such as hypermatter.
  • There is a discussion about the arbitrary nature of faster-than-light (FTL) travel in Star Wars, questioning the consistency of its application across different ships.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no clear consensus on the nature of fusion in Star Wars. Some agree that the science is largely fictional, while others propose speculative models. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of fusion technology and its implications within the Star Wars narrative.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the scientific principles in Star Wars may not adhere to real-world physics, leading to a variety of interpretations and speculative ideas about the technology presented in the series.

Maximum7
Messages
124
Reaction score
11
Fusion power is mentioned a lot in Star Wars. In the Bad Batch arc of the second to last season of Clone Wars, the Separatist facility was powered by a fusion reactor. The A-wing is powered by fusion. GNK droids are walking fusion batteries and they have made fusion furnaces the size of a small generator. It is so commonplace that nobody gives it a second thought. Some ways to achieve fusion are through plasma, magnetic confinement, inertial confinement, Z-pinch, Beam, Muon-catalyzed. Which one does the Star Wars galaxy use?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One we have yet to discover.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Oldman too, DennisN, russ_watters and 1 other person
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and BWV
Maximum7 said:
Fusion power is mentioned a lot in Star Wars.
Do we even know that they mean fusion the way we mean fusion, @Maximum7? It's a universe far far away, after all, concepts might have been lost in translation. They could be fusing dark matter for all we know, it really is a build your own adventure when it comes to Star Wars tech.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron and BillTre
Melbourne Guy said:
Do we even know that they mean fusion the way we mean fusion, @Maximum7? It's a universe far far away, after all, concepts might have been lost in translation. They could be fusing dark matter for all we know, it really is a build your own adventure when it comes to Star Wars tech.

I’m pretty sure it’s regular fusion. Dark matter and dark energy is mentioned as one of the components of Starkiller Base’s weapon
 
The kind of fusion that can make point five beyond the speed of light, does not look like much, but has got it where it counts
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: DennisN and russ_watters
What you get if you cross deuterium pellet, terawatt laser, and primitive human leader from steppes?

Khan fusion! Har!

-- Star Control II
 
Melbourne Guy said:
Do we even know that they mean fusion the way we mean fusion, @Maximum7? It's a universe far far away, after all, concepts might have been lost in translation.
Indeed.
1649787163266.png
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Hamiltonian, BillTre, DennisN and 4 others
DaveC426913 said:
Indeed.
View attachment 299840
Heh. There's a running joke in David Weber's books of humans colonising planets (e.g. Sphinx) and naming the fauna things like "Sphinxian chipmunk" and the narrative providing no description except to note it looks nothing like a chipmunk.

Dragging myself back on topic, Weber's ships are fusion powered and contain the plasma with yet another application of the same gravity manipulation technology everything else in the universe uses.
 
  • #10
Maximum7 said:
Fusion power is mentioned a lot in Star Wars. In the Bad Batch arc of the second to last season of Clone Wars, the Separatist facility was powered by a fusion reactor. The A-wing is powered by fusion. GNK droids are walking fusion batteries and they have made fusion furnaces the size of a small generator. It is so commonplace that nobody gives it a second thought. Some ways to achieve fusion are through plasma, magnetic confinement, inertial confinement, Z-pinch, Beam, Muon-catalyzed. Which one does the Star Wars galaxy use?
The made up kind
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Oldman too, BillTre and DennisN
  • #11
I honestly don’t know why this section exists. What’s the point of discussing sci-fi physics if everyone either is sarcastic or says “it isn’t real-don’t ask”.
 
  • #12
Maximum7 said:
I honestly don’t know why this section exists.
Have you looked at other threads in this section? It's pretty fertile with discussions.

Maximum7 said:
What’s the point of discussing sci-fi physics if everyone either is sarcastic or says “it isn’t real-don’t ask”.
At the risk of being glib, what kinds of responses were you expecting?

(P.S. Nobody has said 'don't ask').
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Oldman too and russ_watters
  • #13
DaveC426913 said:
At the risk of being glib, what kinds of responses were you expecting?
Yeah, it's a really weird question. What is the point/purpose?
 
  • #14
russ_watters said:
Yeah, it's a really weird question. What is the point/purpose?

Well I’m working on a project and exploring the science behind the scenes of Star Wars. The stuff that isn’t mentioned but exists and I was wondering what type of fusion fits the bill for them.
 
  • #15
Maximum7 said:
I honestly don’t know why this section exists. What’s the point of discussing sci-fi physics if everyone either is sarcastic or says “it isn’t real-don’t ask”.
Sorry, @Maximum7, no offence intended, my response was silly because the 'science' of Star Wars is silly. We can find out how we think a fusion reactor will work via Wikipedia and other Google searches, but how that might translate to a 'fusion battery' or an A-wing with a 'fusion reactor' in it? Who knows.

Star Wars uses different physics to us, that's for sure (just think about how those A-wings manoeuvre, non-Newtonian springs to mind), but if you want some speculation, I think the smallest ones are non-thermal, inertial electrostatic types. Larger ones, like ones that power ships, are thermal, levitated dipole types because they need to provide a higher, sustained output.

I've no idea what powers something like a Death Star, though. Wormhole taps into the nearest sun, maybe? It's not fusion reactors, at least not as we know them.
 
  • #16
Maximum7 said:
Well I’m working on a project and exploring the science behind the scenes of Star Wars. The stuff that isn’t mentioned but exists and I was wondering what type of fusion fits the bill for them.
Prefacing your opening post with the above would have helped us understand what you were looking for (though I'm not sure we'd still be much help). :wink:

Melbourne Guy said:
... the 'science' of Star Wars is silly.
I think this hits the nail on the head. Star Wars is not science fiction; it is space fantasy. There is no science in Star Wars. It's not even hand-waving; its literally technobabble. e.g. Spaceships and explosions do not make sound in space, even with handwaving.So, you can certainly create a bible for explanations of the tech, but it's totally arbitrary. There are no wrong answers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Nik_2213, Klystron, russ_watters and 2 others
  • #17
Melbourne Guy said:
Sorry, @Maximum7, no offence intended, my response was silly because the 'science' of Star Wars is silly. We can find out how we think a fusion reactor will work via Wikipedia and other Google searches, but how that might translate to a 'fusion battery' or an A-wing with a 'fusion reactor' in it? Who knows.

Star Wars uses different physics to us, that's for sure (just think about how those A-wings manoeuvre, non-Newtonian springs to mind), but if you want some speculation, I think the smallest ones are non-thermal, inertial electrostatic types. Larger ones, like ones that power ships, are thermal, levitated dipole types because they need to provide a higher, sustained output.

I've no idea what powers something like a Death Star, though. Wormhole taps into the nearest sun, maybe? It's not fusion reactors, at least not as we know them.
Okay. Thank you very much!

The Death Star is powered by hypermatter. Obviously fake but we still don’t know if superluminal particles do or don’t exist. I’m working very carefully on how to explain FTL in Star Wars.
 
  • #18
Maximum7 said:
how to explain FTL in Star Wars.
Even that is arbitrary.

If an FTL drive is small enough to fit in an X-wing, why don't TIE fighters have them?
After all, that would cut down on the number of Star Destroyers, since they could just launch the TIE fighters from a base light years away.

Additionally, FTL drives are small enough to put in unmanned torpedoes, which can be used to devastating effect, as seen in ... (Google Google) ... SW: TLJ
 
Last edited:
  • #19
DaveC426913 said:
Even that is arbitrary.

If an FTL drive is small enough to fit in an X-wing, why don't TIE fighters have them?
After all, that would cut down on the number of Star Destroyers, since they could just launch the TIE fighters from a base light years away.
Well the TIE’s in the Sequel Trilogy (at least some) could make FTL jumps so perhaps it was some engineering problem OR the Empire was way too cheap to equip them as they view their soldiers as expendable.
 
  • #20
Maximum7 said:
Well I’m working on a project and exploring the science behind the scenes of Star Wars. ...
Outside the technical side of creating motion pictures and television series, science behind Star Wars may be a relatively small category. George Lucas created a division within LucasFilms that he named Industrial Light and Magic, emphasis on magic, not science.

Lucas gives many examples from history and religion that he incorporated into SW themes. Examples derived from the history of science are not obvious in the original films. Biology such as cloning warriors started appearing when cloning became a popular idea. Perhaps later SW related projects include hard science references not apparent in the original films.

I am currently watching an ILM project with family called "Witcher". The fictional Witcher world is explained by magic, sorcery, spells and potions with no recourse to science. Energy sources reside in magic fountains and deep mysterious pools. Scientific objectivity would literally break the spell.
 
  • #21
jedishrfu said:
One we have yet to discover.
Never tell me the odds!
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, jedishrfu and DaveC426913
  • #22
Doesn't it fuse dilithium?
 
  • #23
Vanadium 50 said:
Doesn't it fuse dilithium?

That could be it but it’s more Star Trek
 
  • #24
Vanadium 50 said:
Doesn't it fuse dilithium?
Yeah, but first you have to bounce a tachyon beam off the main deflector dish before attending a classical concert.

Maximum7 said:
Well the TIE’s in the Sequel Trilogy (at least some) could make FTL jumps so perhaps it was some engineering problem OR the Empire was way too cheap to equip them as they view their soldiers as expendable.
I've long viewed the TIE fighters as not necessarily expendable, but cheap and maneuverable fighters designed and built for a massive space navy that has to protect a huge amount of territory against raiders, terrorists, smugglers, and the like that use mostly obsolete or semi-civilian ships. Who needs expensive and bulky hyperdrives (and deflectors) when you're probably going to have small outposts on most worlds that you can just man with a dozen or so cheap fighters that will easily handle 99.9% of everything they'll come across. The fact that the rebel alliance has modern warships and advanced fighters is a development that just wasn't expected. The later-developed TIE Interceptors and TIE Advanced fighters were responses to this.

This contrasts with the fighters of the rebel alliance, which can't depend on having a base or outpost on every other planet and have no chance of matching the manpower of the Imperial Navy. They need to be flexible, durable, and able to achieve local superiority even when outnumbered. A handful of fighters with their own hyperdrives have the independence and flexibility to dogfight on monday, run a blockade to meet up with a resistance cell on tuesday, strike an unsupported imperial squadron on wednesday, scatter and hide from a retaliatory attack on thursday, smuggle a couple of proton torpedoes from an imperial armory while on the way back to base on friday, and rest and refit on saturday and sunday.

Those attempting to poke a hole in my headcanon will be slapped with a fish. A large fish.
 
  • #25
Maximum7 said:
The Death Star is powered by hypermatter.
Did not know that. But I was lucky enough to be in the cinemas for the original Star Wars movie when it was released. Even as a sci-fi nerd, I could see that George Lucas drew more from fantasy than science for what was an amazing special effects epic. That's what we all talked about - and what he was often interviewed about - the special effects, there was no 'science' to discuss.

Everything since is made up retrofit, and as @DaveC426913 has noted, pretty much arbitrary!

Maximum7 said:
I’m working very carefully on how to explain FTL in Star Wars.
I'm not sure this means, @Maximum7? Carefully in what sense?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron
  • #26
Melbourne Guy said:
Did not know that. But I was lucky enough to be in the cinemas for the original Star Wars movie when it was released. Even as a sci-fi nerd, I could see that George Lucas drew more from fantasy than science for what was an amazing special effects epic. That's what we all talked about - and what he was often interviewed about - the special effects, there was no 'science' to discuss.

Everything since is made up retrofit, and as @DaveC426913 has noted, pretty much arbitrary!I'm not sure this means, @Maximum7? Carefully in what sense?
I’ve been doing a lot of research. Going faster than light as an acceleration is a complete impossibility and tachyons if they exist; would go backwards in time. The only reason ships can move FTL is that hyperspace is another dimension where c does not apply and they can move many million times faster than light. A infographic estimated that the Millennium Falcon can move 4 quadrillion miles per hour give or take. Also since hyperspace is a separate dimension there is no time dilation either.
 
  • #27
Maximum7 said:
Well I’m working on a project and exploring the science behind the scenes of Star Wars. The stuff that isn’t mentioned but exists and I was wondering what type of fusion fits the bill for them.
What makes you think the stuff that isn't mentioned exists?

What sort of project?
Obviously fake but we still don’t know if superluminal particles do or don’t exist. I’m working very carefully on how to explain FTL in Star Wars.
I'll be blunt here: the reason people aren't treating this seriously is because the tone of what you are saying implies you don't recognize the difference between science and science fiction, since statements like that pull the two together. Hopefully that impression is incorrect.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and Oldman too
  • #28
Maximum7 said:
I’ve been doing a lot of research.
That's a good start, I've found research on FTL interesting and fun when I've done it for my novels 👍

Maximum7 said:
Going faster than light as an acceleration is a complete impossibility and tachyons if they exist; would go backwards in time.
Have you considered a circular universe where if you go 'back' far enough you can end up in your own future?

Maximum7 said:
The only reason ships can move FTL is that hyperspace is another dimension where c does not apply and they can move many million times faster than light.
There is also the configuration where hyperspace (or whatever name it has, but often it is called a wormhole) represents a shorter path between two points in our normal universe. In that case, we would record the ship traveling FTL, but it never has to actually exceed the speed of light itself, and might actually consider itself to be moving very slowly indeed.

Maximum7 said:
A infographic estimated that the Millennium Falcon can move 4 quadrillion miles per hour give or take.
I think @DaveC426913 gave the Millennium Falcon's official speed back in Post #8, as nonsensical as that is, but why would this infographic be an authoritative source?

Maximum7 said:
Also since hyperspace is a separate dimension there is no time dilation either.
I assume you mean time dilation based on general relativity, but why do you believe this to be true?
 
  • #29
Melbourne Guy said:
That's a good start, I've found research on FTL interesting and fun when I've done it for my novels 👍Have you considered a circular universe where if you go 'back' far enough you can end up in your own future?There is also the configuration where hyperspace (or whatever name it has, but often it is called a wormhole) represents a shorter path between two points in our normal universe. In that case, we would record the ship traveling FTL, but it never has to actually exceed the speed of light itself, and might actually consider itself to be moving very slowly indeed.I think @DaveC426913 gave the Millennium Falcon's official speed back in Post #8, as nonsensical as that is, but why would this infographic be an authoritative source?I assume you mean time dilation based on general relativity, but why do you believe this to be true?
I think they professionally calculated it. The infographic is no longer on a site.

As for time dilation; I just assume none of the rules work since they get there within the same time as the rest of the universe
 
  • #30
Maximum7 said:
As for time dilation; I just assume none of the rules work since they get there within the same time as the rest of the universe
Good point!

But it's all handwavium in the end, which is why we can essentially posit anything we like. For example, I could suggest that the FTL isn't anything of the kind, it's actually a dimensional jump to the next nearest parallel universe that matches the desired location, but a nanosecond out of phase so the protagonists never meet themselves and expose the trick!

Or, another idea I had many (many!) years ago was that FTL is achieved via time travel. You go back in time, then launch to your destination - slowly, no need for speed - and once underway, you enter status, which is a local bubble of zero time, for the duration of your very long slower-than-light trip, then come out of status when you're where you need to be, with no perceived time having passed.

(Both of these are admittedly pretty sketchy and neither is how I expect FTL is done in Star Wars, I think it's a "traditional" hyperdrive going above / below reality and shortening the travel time approach.)

Maximum7 said:
I think they professionally calculated it. The infographic is no longer on a site.
That's interesting, do you know if there's enough clues in the movies (and books?) for the distance between two systems to be mentioned and the Millennium Falcon's travel time to be also mentioned? That's the only way I can imagine a speed estimation being done 🤔