124 réponses à ce sujet

[Lukertin]

Commisar_V wrote...

KBGeller wrote...

Um, not true at all. The laws of physics have stayed mostly the same for the past 2 or 3 hundred years. Some new ones have come about for sure, especially with new findings that people could not have known about until now. But yes, they very likely could be/are wrong. Well, some of them.

See: Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation vs. The General Theory of Relativity.

See: Grand Unification Theory

[Raezaiel]

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

[KalosCast]

Raezaiel wrote...

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

If you halve the mass to double the velocity, you get a significantly higher KE.

1.0g moving at 1.0m/s: KE = 1.0 * 1.0^2 = 1.0
0.5g moving at 2.0m/s: KE = 0.5 * 2.0^2 = 2.0

Modifié par KalosCast, 03 février 2010 - 12:24 .

[AL JA]

On a related note, for those talking about how jelly moving at high speed could kill you, meet the guy who stuck his head in a particle accelerator and survived. http://www.neatorama...le-accelerator/

[Commisar_V]

AL JA wrote...

On a related note, for those talking about how jelly moving at high speed could kill you, meet the guy who stuck his head in a particle accelerator and survived. http://www.neatorama...le-accelerator/

(though we don’t know of anyone else who has been exposed to
radiation in the form of a proton beam moving at about the speed of
sound).


Speed of sound isn't that fast, Navy Railgun goes 7x the speed of sound. I'm sure futuristic guns could move it even faster.

[aaniadyen]

IceColdFulcrum wrote...

Okay, lets try it this way, I will try and keep it simple....

The formula for Kinetic Energy is this:
Energy = (mass*0.5)*(Velocity*Velocity)

Now if you look at it, you will see that the velocity of the projectile is far far more important than the mass of it, which is halved anyway for the formula.

So reducing the mass of a projectile so you can jack up the velocity is really useful.

Take a 0.05kg projectile at 1000 m/s and you get 25 kilojoules of energy
Reduce the mass by 10% and increase the velocity by 10%, you have the same amount of force (mass x velocity) but your kinetic energy has jumped to 27.225 kj.

So velocity is important....

Now we can get into flamewars about overpenetration, hydraulic shock and whatnot....

This is exactly how it works as stated in the codex. The ammunition is shaved in a fashion to cause it to chip away on impact to it doesn't shoot straight through. It shatters on impact, or extremely shortly after. So it works very much like the lead-tiped soda-can crush type thing we have going now.

[KBGeller]

AL JA wrote...

On a related note, for those talking about how jelly moving at high speed could kill you, meet the guy who stuck his head in a particle accelerator and survived. http://www.neatorama...le-accelerator/

Yeah, I heard about that. We call it luck

[Raezaiel]

KalosCast wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

If you halve the mass to double the velocity, you get a significantly higher KE.

1.0g moving at 1.0m/s: KE = 1.0 * 1.0^2 = 1.0
0.5g moving at 2.0m/s: KE = 0.5 * 2.0^2 = 2.0

uh look you fail at math, sorry. Hi lets go over the basics, lowering the mass imparts a higher velocity BECAUSE OF THIS EQUATION if you half the mass, the velocity does not double. please use the equation.

[Lukertin]

Raezaiel wrote...
lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

A pointless argument re: bullet speed when discussing conventional weaponry, because it isn't the size of the bullet that matters so much (or its speed), it's where the bullet hits a person and what the bullet does once it enters flesh.
To this effect you want bullets that travel faster so you ensure it will hit where you aim the gun, and secondly, you want bullets that splinter once they impact to maximize trauma.

Mass of projectile doesn't necessarily come into play (size of projectile does, but size does not necessarily represent mass).

[Myrmedus]

KalosCast wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

If you halve the mass to double the velocity, you get a significantly higher KE.

1.0g moving at 1.0m/s: KE = 1.0 * 1.0^2 = 1.0
0.5g moving at 2.0m/s: KE = 0.5 * 2.0^2 = 2.0

Just realized though that I'm not sure this would work even though people have said it numerous times in here.

You see the mass effect fields reduce mass in order to increase velocity right? Why are we assuming that the function is reciprocated in nature? I don't believe the mass effect field is able to change the kinetic energy of the mass, since it's not injecting any form of energy, so when you reduce the mass by 1/2 you won't double the velocity - you'll double the velocity squared.

Therefore, you'll end up increasing the velocity by a factor of root 2, which will result in identical kinetic energy and therefore no additional damage dealt by the weapon. The problem is that everyone who thinks simply reducing the mass of the projectile is enough are assuming the relationship between the velocity and the mass is linear where it's quadratic due to the KE formula.

It boils down to something very very simple - does the mass effect field inject energy into the projectile? If it does, it'll improve its damage. If it does not, it will not no matter how much it increases its velocity.

[DesetFox1943]

..And here I thought Integrated Physics and Chemistry wouldn't help. That being said, How do we know the Bullets don't retain a field around them or a kinetic barrier or..What ever..

[Raezaiel]

Myrmedus wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

If you halve the mass to double the velocity, you get a significantly higher KE.

1.0g moving at 1.0m/s: KE = 1.0 * 1.0^2 = 1.0
0.5g moving at 2.0m/s: KE = 0.5 * 2.0^2 = 2.0

Just realized though that I'm not sure this would work even though people have said it numerous times in here.

You see the mass effect fields reduce mass in order to increase velocity right? Why are we assuming that the function is reciprocated in nature? I don't believe the mass effect field is able to change the kinetic energy of the mass, since it's not injecting any form of energy, so when you reduce the mass by 1/2 you won't double the velocity - you'll double the velocity squared.

Therefore, you'll end up increasing the velocity by a factor of root 2, which will result in identical kinetic energy and therefore no additional damage dealt by the weapon. The problem is that everyone who thinks simply reducing the mass of the projectile is enough are assuming the relationship between the velocity and the mass is linear where it's quadratic due to the KE formula.

It boils down to something very very simple - does the mass effect field inject energy into the projectile? If it does, it'll improve its damage. If it does not, it will not no matter how much it increases its velocity.

this man got it.

[Raezaiel]

DesetFox1943 wrote...

..And here I thought Integrated Physics and Chemistry wouldn't help. That being said, How do we know the Bullets don't retain a field around them or a kinetic barrier or..What ever..

well if they didn't retain a mass reducing field, they would just fall out of the air because their velocity would instantly drop to zero as their mass increased.

[WrexShepard]

KBGeller wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Conservation of Momentum and Energy still apply, but since Mass Effect reduces mass in an unconventional manner, you can not apply standard laws of physics to particles acted on by it.

When a Mass Accelerator lowers the mass of a particle, it's not done using conventional methods.

So therefore, when the mass effect field no longer affects the slug, it is as if the slug was accelerated to its velocity at its current mass, with a standard mass accelerator, except it has taken much less energy to do so.

Uh... what do you mean? Of course the laws of physics still apply. Because they wouldn't be laws if there were exceptions.

And mass accelerators do not EVER lower the mass of particles. They actually increase the mass of particles. Because you CANNOT EVER go faster than the speed of light and so when you approach the SoL and keep adding energy, mass increases.

The laws of physics apply everywhere but inside mass effect fields. The nature of "mass effect" as a sort of deus ex handwave means that the laws of physics do not operate within a ME field. If they did, Mass Effect wouldn't be possible, which is why it is fictional and doesn't exist in reality.

Mass accelerators do not ever lower the mass of particles in reality- yes, but in Mass Effect they do. Element Zero and mass effect lower the mass of the particle allowing it to be accelerated with much less energy. When it leaves the ME envelope, the particles have the mass, kinetic energy, and velocity of a particle that had been accelerated by a conventional accelerator, however much less energy has been expended in the process.

Do you understand now? This is also why FTL travel is possible in ME, because of the nature of ME fields, the "limit" where a particle has infinite mass and requires infinite energy to accelerate is never reached, as the field is actively reducing the mass so that said threshold is never reached.

Myrmedus wrote...


It boils down to something very very
simple - does the mass effect field inject energy into the projectile?
If it does, it'll improve its damage. If it does not, it will not no
matter how much it increases its velocity.

Considering Element Zero is an unobtanium material which is essentially a free energy device, yes I would say the mass effect field "injects" energy into the projectile.

Modifié par WrexShepard, 03 février 2010 - 12:37 .

[Lukertin]

Myrmedus wrote...
Therefore, you'll end up increasing the velocity by a factor of root 2, which will result in identical kinetic energy and therefore no additional damage dealt by the weapon. The problem is that everyone who thinks simply reducing the mass of the projectile is enough are assuming the relationship between the velocity and the mass is linear where it's quadratic due to the KE formula.

It boils down to something very very simple - does the mass effect field inject energy into the projectile? If it does, it'll improve its damage. If it does not, it will not no matter how much it increases its velocity.

Faulty assumption.
Increased velocity with lower mass means less frictional force compared to a lower velocity with higher mass.
The bullet (and its shrapnel) will travel longer in a person, causing more trauma.
More trauma = more damage.

[Myrmedus]

Lukertin wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...
lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

A pointless argument re: bullet speed when discussing conventional weaponry, because it isn't the size of the bullet that matters so much (or its speed), it's where the bullet hits a person and what the bullet does once it enters flesh.
To this effect you want bullets that travel faster so you ensure it will hit where you aim the gun, and secondly, you want bullets that splinter once they impact to maximize trauma.

Mass of projectile doesn't necessarily come into play (size of projectile does, but size does not necessarily represent mass).

Incorrect. If the bullet's size is larger without its mass also increasing then its structural integrity is compromised due to a lower density. Therefore much of its kinetic energy is 'wasted' in its increased deformation.This is why cars that 'disintegrate' a little at the front are safer in road accidents because they 'absorb' the energy better. Another example is why you can slam a metallic plate against the floor and it won't smash but if you do it with china it will.

The same goes for a 'hollow' projectile an awful lot of its energy is 'absorbed' by its destruction and deformation. A higher density projectile will have less energy wasted in its own deformation and therefore an awful lot more kinetic energy will be released on the target, producing more damage.

[Raezaiel]

Wrex as I have said many times, the mass reducing effect works perfectly in theoretical physics for TRAVEL, not imparting force at the end. Its just weird that they put the mode of travel into weapons like a giant mass effect gun or some weird crap. And there is even a guy saying Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest sob in space. F = MA the reason it can be accelerated so fast is because of its mass being lowered, so uhh you have a paradox

[Lukertin]

Myrmedus wrote...
Incorrect. If the bullet's size is larger without its mass also increasing then its structural integrity is compromised due to a lower density. Therefore much of its kinetic energy is 'wasted' in its increased deformation.This is why cars that 'disintegrate' a little at the front are safer in road accidents because they 'absorb' the energy better. Another example is why you can slam a metallic plate against the floor and it won't smash but if you do it with china it will.

The same goes for a 'hollow' projectile an awful lot of its energy is 'absorbed' by its destruction and deformation. A higher density projectile will have less energy wasted in its own deformation and therefore an awful lot more kinetic energy will be released on the target, producing more damage.

Wrong.  Hollowpoint tips are more lethal than solidpoint tips because they BREAK UP upon entry and do more trauma to the person's flesh.  Bullets that 'disintegrate' once they enter into a person are much more catastrophic than something that doesn't break up.

[Myrmedus]

Lukertin wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...
Therefore, you'll end up increasing the velocity by a factor of root 2, which will result in identical kinetic energy and therefore no additional damage dealt by the weapon. The problem is that everyone who thinks simply reducing the mass of the projectile is enough are assuming the relationship between the velocity and the mass is linear where it's quadratic due to the KE formula.

It boils down to something very very simple - does the mass effect field inject energy into the projectile? If it does, it'll improve its damage. If it does not, it will not no matter how much it increases its velocity.

Faulty assumption.
Increased velocity with lower mass means less frictional force compared to a lower velocity with higher mass.
The bullet (and its shrapnel) will travel longer in a person, causing more trauma.
More trauma = more damage.

Yes it does but the frictional force is proportional, meaning that a higher mess round will still deal more damage even inspite of higher frictional force.

In addition, frictional force is based upon air resistance which therefore puts it in the same boat as the terminal velocity calculations for falling objects - in other words, there's a point at which velocity becomes high enough that frictional force becomes a proportional constant and the calculation forgoes any frictional variance.

[Raezaiel]

and if the mass is lower how do you overcome drag in the atmosphere, I mean throw a baseball and compare that to a nerf ball the same size, is blatantly obvious that mass matters, the air stops nerf balls way way earlier.

[Commisar_V]

I still don't remember the actual Mass Effect being used in the guns, I was under the impression that they were railguns or coilguns.

[KalosCast]

Raezaiel wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...

lukertin for space travel it works perfectly, the whole point of this post is to point out the flaw in lowering the mass of a bullet because the whole darn point of a bullet is to impart kinetic energy and lowering its mass increases its velocity because it must retain its kinetic energy. KE = mv^2 so SQRT(KE/m) = v and lower its mass only increases velocity and imparts no more energy, thus no damage to tissue thus making it hit someone with whatever original KE it started with.

If you halve the mass to double the velocity, you get a significantly higher KE.

1.0g moving at 1.0m/s: KE = 1.0 * 1.0^2 = 1.0
0.5g moving at 2.0m/s: KE = 0.5 * 2.0^2 = 2.0

uh look you fail at math, sorry. Hi lets go over the basics, lowering the mass imparts a higher velocity BECAUSE OF THIS EQUATION if you half the mass, the velocity does not double. please use the equation.

Nope, eezo, which changes the mass,  is effected by electrical charge. Once it leaves
the gun, it loses that charge, the velocity remains constant and the
mass increases. It's not "growing" the mass from the Kinetic energy so
it wouldn't need to pull it from the velocity. The bullet is not a
closed system.

[WrexShepard]

Raezaiel wrote...

Wrex as I have said many times, the mass reducing effect works perfectly in theoretical physics for TRAVEL, not imparting force at the end. Its just weird that they put the mode of travel into weapons like a giant mass effect gun or some weird crap. And there is even a guy saying Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest sob in space. F = MA the reason it can be accelerated so fast is because of its mass being lowered, so uhh you have a paradox

It only works for travel because of the properties of Element Zero. Likewise, it works for the guns because of Element Zero.

It's mass is lowered only in the Mass Effect field, which isn't an area of normal space. When it leaves the field, it is as if it has been fired by a conventional mass accelerator which would use up a lot more energy.

Basically, Element Zero is reality hax.

[Myrmedus]

Lukertin wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...
Incorrect. If the bullet's size is larger without its mass also increasing then its structural integrity is compromised due to a lower density. Therefore much of its kinetic energy is 'wasted' in its increased deformation.This is why cars that 'disintegrate' a little at the front are safer in road accidents because they 'absorb' the energy better. Another example is why you can slam a metallic plate against the floor and it won't smash but if you do it with china it will.

The same goes for a 'hollow' projectile an awful lot of its energy is 'absorbed' by its destruction and deformation. A higher density projectile will have less energy wasted in its own deformation and therefore an awful lot more kinetic energy will be released on the target, producing more damage.

Wrong.  Hollowpoint tips are more lethal than solidpoint tips because they BREAK UP upon entry and do more trauma to the person's flesh.  Bullets that 'disintegrate' once they enter into a person are much more catastrophic than something that doesn't break up.

You're not talking about the same thing here - you're talking about ballistics which has nothing to do with this discussion. Stating that shrapnel rounds deal more damage than normal rounds is obvious but we're not talking about lethality from bullet-specific ballistics - that's a tangential argument - we're talking about how a mass effect field can improve the kinetic energy-based damage a bullet deals.

What you're talking about is a perfect kinetic energy 'horizon' (or 'sweet-spot') where the bullet stays in the body and perhaps breaks up, which of course isn't going to be the maximum potential kinetic energy for the bullet to have and thus makes it a different topic than the one being discussed here. In addition, if this kind of round was universally better it would be used more often, the reason it isn't is that it's useless for any kind of armor penetration including basic kevlar armor applications. The simply reason why is BECAUSE it's designed to break apart, it ends up breaking up on the armor and producing very little impact.

In other words, these are two very different arguments

Modifié par Myrmedus, 03 février 2010 - 12:44 .

[Raezaiel]

element zero is only the unobtainium used to lower mass not explain how bullets suddenly gain energy.