124 réponses à ce sujet

[WrexShepard]

Myrmedus wrote...

classicismo wrote...

I had a whole witty paragraph about how many times the laws of physics have been altered as our understanding of the universe is altered, and so really; this discussion is completely pointless as the general concensus on what's physically 'possible' could be vastly different in 200 years time (for example; what kind of effect does element zero have on the way mass and acceleration and force impact each other) .... then I realized that this is a videogame forum, and also that i'm hungry at this present moment in time, I'm going to maccy d's.

This is the only part that can't be argued to or fro indeed. What element zero does is pure, PURE sci-fi so I won't argue whether it can help or not because it's not explicitly stated what the hell it really does.

However in terms of pure mass effect fields as they're DESCRIBED at least, they'd have no impact on a weapon's damage.

Mass Effect fields in this fictional setting can raise or lower mass and exert forces on objects.

EeZo isn't pure science fiction, it's just pure fiction. That being said, something that can temporarily reduce mass and then have that mass restored as if the mass was never reduced in the first place sure as hell will impact weapon damage in that projectiles can be accelrated to velocities previously impractical.

[Myrmedus]

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

classicismo wrote...

I had a whole witty paragraph about how many times the laws of physics have been altered as our understanding of the universe is altered, and so really; this discussion is completely pointless as the general concensus on what's physically 'possible' could be vastly different in 200 years time (for example; what kind of effect does element zero have on the way mass and acceleration and force impact each other) .... then I realized that this is a videogame forum, and also that i'm hungry at this present moment in time, I'm going to maccy d's.

This is the only part that can't be argued to or fro indeed. What element zero does is pure, PURE sci-fi so I won't argue whether it can help or not because it's not explicitly stated what the hell it really does.

However in terms of pure mass effect fields as they're DESCRIBED at least, they'd have no impact on a weapon's damage.

Mass Effect fields in this fictional setting can raise or lower mass and exert forces on objects.

EeZo isn't pure science fiction, it's just pure fiction. That being said, something that can temporarily reduce mass and then have that mass restored as if the mass was never reduced in the first place sure as hell will impact weapon damage in that projectiles can be accelrated to velocities previously impractical.

Force exertion is actually irrelevant because without the assigned additional energy it simply becomes a fleeting impulse.

However I'm not going to debate over potential energy induction from EeZo because I don't know enough about the concept, all I'm going to say is solely changing the mass of an object will not affect its damage (in the case of a weapon projectile). Where you wish to go beyond that is up to you but that's all I've been saying throughout the entire thread

[aaniadyen]

Myrmedus wrote...
No we don't because a mass effect field doesn't have any effect on the energy required for it to do its job. Let me put it simply: changing the mass of an object has absolutely no bearing on its energy injection or power reaction whatsoever, and those are the only two things that matter when it comes to this.

The mass effect field doesn't reduce the projectile size. This is not what causes the projectile to achieve high velocity with less energy. The mass effect field allows the eezo to do it's job.

[WrexShepard]

Myrmedus wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

classicismo wrote...

I had a whole witty paragraph about how many times the laws of physics have been altered as our understanding of the universe is altered, and so really; this discussion is completely pointless as the general concensus on what's physically 'possible' could be vastly different in 200 years time (for example; what kind of effect does element zero have on the way mass and acceleration and force impact each other) .... then I realized that this is a videogame forum, and also that i'm hungry at this present moment in time, I'm going to maccy d's.

This is the only part that can't be argued to or fro indeed. What element zero does is pure, PURE sci-fi so I won't argue whether it can help or not because it's not explicitly stated what the hell it really does.

However in terms of pure mass effect fields as they're DESCRIBED at least, they'd have no impact on a weapon's damage.

Mass Effect fields in this fictional setting can raise or lower mass and exert forces on objects.

EeZo isn't pure science fiction, it's just pure fiction. That being said, something that can temporarily reduce mass and then have that mass restored as if the mass was never reduced in the first place sure as hell will impact weapon damage in that projectiles can be accelrated to velocities previously impractical.

Force exertion is actually irrelevant because without the assigned additional energy it simply becomes a fleeting impulse.

However I'm not going to debate over potential energy induction from EeZo because I don't know enough about the concept, all I'm going to say is solely changing the mass of an object will not affect its damage (in the case of a weapon projectile). Where you wish to go beyond that is up to you but that's all I've been saying throughout the entire thread

Soley changing the mass allows you to achieve higher velocities with less energy. A conventional railgun could not be carried by a human. This allows mass accelerators to rest in the palm of your hand. Understand?

[Myrmedus]

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

classicismo wrote...

I had a whole witty paragraph about how many times the laws of physics have been altered as our understanding of the universe is altered, and so really; this discussion is completely pointless as the general concensus on what's physically 'possible' could be vastly different in 200 years time (for example; what kind of effect does element zero have on the way mass and acceleration and force impact each other) .... then I realized that this is a videogame forum, and also that i'm hungry at this present moment in time, I'm going to maccy d's.

This is the only part that can't be argued to or fro indeed. What element zero does is pure, PURE sci-fi so I won't argue whether it can help or not because it's not explicitly stated what the hell it really does.

However in terms of pure mass effect fields as they're DESCRIBED at least, they'd have no impact on a weapon's damage.

Mass Effect fields in this fictional setting can raise or lower mass and exert forces on objects.

EeZo isn't pure science fiction, it's just pure fiction. That being said, something that can temporarily reduce mass and then have that mass restored as if the mass was never reduced in the first place sure as hell will impact weapon damage in that projectiles can be accelrated to velocities previously impractical.

Force exertion is actually irrelevant because without the assigned additional energy it simply becomes a fleeting impulse.

However I'm not going to debate over potential energy induction from EeZo because I don't know enough about the concept, all I'm going to say is solely changing the mass of an object will not affect its damage (in the case of a weapon projectile). Where you wish to go beyond that is up to you but that's all I've been saying throughout the entire thread

Soley changing the mass allows you to achieve higher velocities with less energy. A conventional railgun could not be carried by a human. This allows mass accelerators to rest in the palm of your hand. Understand?

Of course I understand, however like I said we've had crossed wires because I was arguing with someone else before you entered the argument and therefore I wasn't sure what you were trying to say, whereas the original person I was discussing with was trying to say that reducing mass, purely reducing mass, improves weapon damage.

What you appear to be saying is that reducing mass purely makes the weapon easier to use: yes, if it's used for purely 'lightening the load' so that Shepard can use the weapon then it helps. It still doesn't reduce the recoil reaction on its own (perhaps this is what EeZo helps with) but it makes the weapon itself lighter.

Oh and hehe - in reality at least a railgun can quite easily be carried by a human now - shweet

Modifié par Myrmedus, 03 février 2010 - 01:53 .

[cashogy]

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...


The railgun part of it will improve its damage, the mass effect field part will have no part in its destructive power whatsoever nor will it effect the recoil. Recoil is an energetic reaction therefore if you try to propel a lower mass object at higher velocity you will still get the same recoil.

So while I know you're just quoting the codex I'm going to say that they're completely wrong  - especially on the paint chip nuclear weapon thing because it's not possible, at least not with a mass effect field as has been described.

I told you not to read the stupid paint chip part. It was just to illustrate the point that making things go really fast increases their kinetic energy.


The Mass Effect field means the electromagnetic railgun needs less energy to do its job. The Railgun is still doing most of the work yes. However, the only way for it to work the way it does is with a free energy machine, namely, element zero. Do we now understand each other?

lol idk where Bioware read that a paint chip could hit you with the force of a nuke

a paint chip has a mass of lets say 2g, which is equal to .002 kg. the speed of light is 300000 km/s. if you want to put this into the mass accelerator/mass effect gun, the value of mass1 becomes essentially 0, for the sake of math we will say .000001, thats 1/1000th of a gram. as previously stated by someone in this thread, you can find the final velocity of a projecticle by this equation:  v(f) = v(i)*sqrt(mi/mf)

so, v(f) is equal to 6,708 km/s, and that is still ****ing fast. the space shuttle needs to be going 11 km/s to leave the earth's gravitational field. now if you want to take the momentum of that projectile, it is 13.4 kN/m. a little conversion magic (4.2x10^12 N/m per kiloton) and this paint chip hits an object with 3.2x10^-9 kilotons. more conversion magic yields .012 lbs. lol thats some nuclear paint chip

[grumpymooselion]

The problem with being a nerd that likes sci-fi is that you have the potential for also being a nerd that understands basic scientific laws - thereby partially making suspension of disbelief a little harder.

[WrexShepard]

Myrmedus wrote...


Of course I understand, however like I said we've had crossed wires because I was arguing with someone else before you entered the argument and therefore I wasn't sure what you were trying to say, whereas the original person I was discussing with was trying to say that reducing mass, purely reducing mass, improves weapon damage.

What you appear to be saying is that reducing mass purely makes the weapon easier to use: yes, if it's used for purely 'lightening the load' so that Shepard can use the weapon then it helps. It still doesn't reduce the recoil reaction on its own (perhaps this is what EeZo helps with) but it makes the weapon itself lighter.

Oh and hehe - in reality at least a railgun can quite easily be carried by a human now - shweet

Well you can carry a railgun in your hand but it's not going to be a formidable weapon. Me and my friend actually built a coilgun (not the same but works on similar principles) and it used a lot of power and hurt about as bad as a BB gun. (Yes, I've been shot with a Gauss Rifle, envy me.)

The codex states that the mass effect field doesn't help that much with reducing recoil. But anyway, these guns work like regular railguns but they don't need a massive power source to carry around.

[WrexShepard]

cashogy wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...


The railgun part of it will improve its damage, the mass effect field part will have no part in its destructive power whatsoever nor will it effect the recoil. Recoil is an energetic reaction therefore if you try to propel a lower mass object at higher velocity you will still get the same recoil.

So while I know you're just quoting the codex I'm going to say that they're completely wrong  - especially on the paint chip nuclear weapon thing because it's not possible, at least not with a mass effect field as has been described.

I told you not to read the stupid paint chip part. It was just to illustrate the point that making things go really fast increases their kinetic energy.


The Mass Effect field means the electromagnetic railgun needs less energy to do its job. The Railgun is still doing most of the work yes. However, the only way for it to work the way it does is with a free energy machine, namely, element zero. Do we now understand each other?

lol idk where Bioware read that a paint chip could hit you with the force of a nuke

a paint chip has a mass of lets say 2g, which is equal to .002 kg. the speed of light is 300000 km/s. if you want to put this into the mass accelerator/mass effect gun, the value of mass1 becomes essentially 0, for the sake of math we will say .000001, thats 1/1000th of a gram. as previously stated by someone in this thread, you can find the final velocity of a projecticle by this equation:  v(f) = v(i)*sqrt(mi/mf)

so, v(f) is equal to 6,708 km/s, and that is still ****ing fast. the space shuttle needs to be going 11 km/s to leave the earth's gravitational field. now if you want to take the momentum of that projectile, it is 13.4 kN/m. a little conversion magic (4.2x10^12 N/m per kiloton) and this paint chip hits an object with 3.2x10^-9 kilotons. more conversion magic yields .012 lbs. lol thats some nuclear paint chip

I wish people would stop talking about the stupid paint chip it's a stupid layman's analogy that doesn't hold up and they never should have used it.

[Myrmedus]

cashogy wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...


The railgun part of it will improve its damage, the mass effect field part will have no part in its destructive power whatsoever nor will it effect the recoil. Recoil is an energetic reaction therefore if you try to propel a lower mass object at higher velocity you will still get the same recoil.

So while I know you're just quoting the codex I'm going to say that they're completely wrong  - especially on the paint chip nuclear weapon thing because it's not possible, at least not with a mass effect field as has been described.

I told you not to read the stupid paint chip part. It was just to illustrate the point that making things go really fast increases their kinetic energy.


The Mass Effect field means the electromagnetic railgun needs less energy to do its job. The Railgun is still doing most of the work yes. However, the only way for it to work the way it does is with a free energy machine, namely, element zero. Do we now understand each other?

lol idk where Bioware read that a paint chip could hit you with the force of a nuke

a paint chip has a mass of lets say 2g, which is equal to .002 kg. the speed of light is 300000 km/s. if you want to put this into the mass accelerator/mass effect gun, the value of mass1 becomes essentially 0, for the sake of math we will say .000001, thats 1/1000th of a gram. as previously stated by someone in this thread, you can find the final velocity of a projecticle by this equation:  v(f) = v(i)*sqrt(mi/mf)

so, v(f) is equal to 6,708 km/s, and that is still ****ing fast. the space shuttle needs to be going 11 km/s to leave the earth's gravitational field. now if you want to take the momentum of that projectile, it is 13.4 kN/m. a little conversion magic (4.2x10^12 N/m per kiloton) and this paint chip hits an object with 3.2x10^-9 kilotons. more conversion magic yields .012 lbs. lol thats some nuclear paint chip

Idd.

Not to mention that this illustrates how mass directly correlates to destructive power - the sheer fact the measurement is "force per distance per mass unit" should indicate that.

[Myrmedus]

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...


Of course I understand, however like I said we've had crossed wires because I was arguing with someone else before you entered the argument and therefore I wasn't sure what you were trying to say, whereas the original person I was discussing with was trying to say that reducing mass, purely reducing mass, improves weapon damage.

What you appear to be saying is that reducing mass purely makes the weapon easier to use: yes, if it's used for purely 'lightening the load' so that Shepard can use the weapon then it helps. It still doesn't reduce the recoil reaction on its own (perhaps this is what EeZo helps with) but it makes the weapon itself lighter.

Oh and hehe - in reality at least a railgun can quite easily be carried by a human now - shweet

Well you can carry a railgun in your hand but it's not going to be a formidable weapon. Me and my friend actually built a coilgun (not the same but works on similar principles) and it used a lot of power and hurt about as bad as a BB gun. (Yes, I've been shot with a Gauss Rifle, envy me.)

The codex states that the mass effect field doesn't help that much with reducing recoil. But anyway, these guns work like regular railguns but they don't need a massive power source to carry around.

Sorry to nitpick but again um...the same power source would still be required regardless of a mass effect field, the only difference would be that 'power source' weighing less.

[WrexShepard]

Myrmedus wrote...

WrexShepard wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...


Of course I understand, however like I said we've had crossed wires because I was arguing with someone else before you entered the argument and therefore I wasn't sure what you were trying to say, whereas the original person I was discussing with was trying to say that reducing mass, purely reducing mass, improves weapon damage.

What you appear to be saying is that reducing mass purely makes the weapon easier to use: yes, if it's used for purely 'lightening the load' so that Shepard can use the weapon then it helps. It still doesn't reduce the recoil reaction on its own (perhaps this is what EeZo helps with) but it makes the weapon itself lighter.

Oh and hehe - in reality at least a railgun can quite easily be carried by a human now - shweet

Well you can carry a railgun in your hand but it's not going to be a formidable weapon. Me and my friend actually built a coilgun (not the same but works on similar principles) and it used a lot of power and hurt about as bad as a BB gun. (Yes, I've been shot with a Gauss Rifle, envy me.)

The codex states that the mass effect field doesn't help that much with reducing recoil. But anyway, these guns work like regular railguns but they don't need a massive power source to carry around.

Sorry to nitpick but again um...the same power source would still be required regardless of a mass effect field, the only difference would be that 'power source' weighing less.

Hence why I said they don't need a "massive" power source.

Check!

[Myrmedus]

Haha ok you meant massive literally xD

This is what I mean, it's so, SO easy to misunderstand in discussions like this: I thought you meant massive as in 'really big'. Much easier in person than online, I've had so many arguments with people on forums where it ended up we were talking about two completely different things.

Well anyway got that sorted finally, gonna actually PLAY some ME2 now - tata!

Modifié par Myrmedus, 03 février 2010 - 02:13 .

[WrexShepard]

Myrmedus wrote...

Haha ok you meant massive literally xD

This is what I mean, it's so, SO easy to misunderstand in discussions like this: I thought you meant massive as in 'really big'. Much easier in person than online, I've had so many arguments with people on forums where it ended up we were talking about two completely different things.

Well anyway got that sorted finally, gonna actually PLAY some ME2 now - tata!

Have fun! I'm currently doing college coursework or I'd join you.

[Sleepicub09]

Raezaiel wrote...

Now I know this is scifi but I was thinking. In Mass Effect, the guns lower the mass of a moving object and this raises its velocity. Its kinetic energy doesn't change however because as you lower its mass its velocity increases proportionally (the whole point of lowering mass), thus the end result would be like hitting things with a molecule of oxygen or a very fast pea.

That huge mass cannon that killed the reaper makes no sense. Lowering your mass is great for getting around, but you just don't gain any kinetic energy. If anything you lower your kinetic energy.

your putting to much IRL logic into a video game bruh

[aaniadyen]

Sleepicub09 wrote...

Raezaiel wrote...

Now I know this is scifi but I was thinking. In Mass Effect, the guns lower the mass of a moving object and this raises its velocity. Its kinetic energy doesn't change however because as you lower its mass its velocity increases proportionally (the whole point of lowering mass), thus the end result would be like hitting things with a molecule of oxygen or a very fast pea.

That huge mass cannon that killed the reaper makes no sense. Lowering your mass is great for getting around, but you just don't gain any kinetic energy. If anything you lower your kinetic energy.

your putting to much IRL logic into a video game bruh

Seems as though they worked it out, actually.

[vashts1985]

momentum is momentum is momentum.



an object in motion will stay in motion untill acted upon by an outside force.

this is why Sir. Issac Newton is the baddest son of a B**** in space!





inelastic collision. M1V1+M2V2 = (M1+M2)V



M1V1+M2V2 = MV



M1V1 + M2V2 + M3V3 = (M1+M2+M3)V



M1V1 + M2V2 + M3V3 = MV



MV = (M1+M2)V



MV = (M1+0)V



MV = (M1+0+0)V



MV = MV.



momentum remains constant unless acted upon by an outside force. if mass increases or decreases, velocity must decrease or increase to compensate. First law of motion, which has been stated to still hold true in the mass effect universe.

[BooPi]

Several people have gone over it before, but there are still questions, so maybe I'll give it a shot. It seemed pretty simple to me. The mass effect is described as a field within which objects have their mass greatly reduced. Once they exit the field, their mass is restored but no other properties are affected. The reason this works for acceleration is because, while normally you'd have to worry about balancing the physics equation, the presence of the mass effect field allows you to gain "free" mass upon exiting it.



While in the gun, the mass of the bullet is decreased, so it can gain much greater velocity (was it magnetic propulsion? I don't remember). Once the bullet exits the barrel and is no longer under the mass effect, it gets back its original mass, but has already been accelerated to an extreme velocity.



So it requires little energy to accelerate a nearly mass-less slug to extreme speed, but when it exits the mass effect it magically returns its original mass while retaining its other properties. That right there is where you are expected to suspend your disbelief--obviously, if you could just change a variable in modern physics on a whim like that, we'd all have free energy.



Which makes me wonder why they don't have free energy in the ME universe. How hard could it be to create a mechanical engine, and only put a mass effect field on part of it, creating a >100% energy return? On top of that, it seems that mass effect fields generate heat--so not only do they allow the creation of mechanical energy, but they produce at least one other form of energy as well.



Basically, the fictional "mass effect" allows the bullet to gain "free" mass upon exiting the weapon, thus giving the bullet kinetic energy that it otherwise would not have. It allows you to bypass what would otherwise be limited by basic physics, by changing the mass number to get energy.

[Myrmedus]

Aye I don't get why they needed to do that though. Most of the time Mass Effect is used purely for velocity increases which would be satisfied without completely dismantling basic physics heh. The only time it becomes screwed up is when they try to apply it to weaponry - could've just had the weapons as mass accelerators with highly optimized coils to justify the small size of the weapons.

Also, if what you say is true about Mass Effect, I wonder why ships that use it to move appear to 'phase' out of it all of a sudden; an example: when the Geth invade the Citadel you see all of their ships turn up at a very high velocity and then slow down considerably almost instantaneously, as if this is the point where their mass is returned to its normal state - let me find the video to illustrate what I mean:

Do you see the way the ships' velocity almost instantaneously slows, including Sovereign?

Anyway, if they're making the effect super-sci-fi in terms of being implausible then there's no use in discussing it further, haha - I just thought they were actually trying to justify it in terms of at least established metaphysics.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 03 février 2010 - 04:17 .

[andysdead]

Raezaiel wrote...

uh as soon as the mass returns to the object it loses its velocity. Doesn't matter how fast its going at low mass, it retains its kinetic energy.

you clearly have never studied physics.

Newton's Laws of Motion: read them.

[vashts1985]

Myrmedus wrote...

Aye I don't get why they needed to do that though. Most of the time Mass Effect is used purely for velocity increases which would be satisfied without completely dismantling basic physics heh. The only time it becomes screwed up is when they try to apply it to weaponry - could've just had the weapons as mass accelerators with highly optimized coils to justify the small size of the weapons.

Also, if what you say is true about Mass Effect, I wonder why ships that use it to move appear to 'phase' out of it all of a sudden; an example: when the Geth invade the Citadel you see all of their ships turn up at a very high velocity and then slow down considerably almost instantaneously, as if this is the point where their mass is returned to its normal state - let me find the video to illustrate what I mean:

Do you see the way the ships' velocity almost instantaneously slows, including Sovereign?

Anyway, if they're making the effect super-sci-fi in terms of being implausible then there's no use in discussing it further, haha - I just thought they were actually trying to justify it in terms of at least established metaphysics.

what you are seeing is the ships entering or exiting FTL travel. ships have limited mass effect capabilities, alowing them to travel faster than light. they do not hve the output that the relays are capable of, therefore they can only travel so fast and so far with their mass effect drives.

the relay's take mass effect to the extreme by creating a mass effect bridge between a pair, then sending a ship through that bridge at near zero mass, allowing them to travel much further and faster than regular FTL travel.

yes, your conclusion is correct, as soon as a ship leaves FTL, it slows down, as soon as a ship enters FTL it speeds up. this is because mass is increasing or decreasing

[Zemore]

a wizard did it

[John Forseti]

xMister Vx wrote...

Also, how does using a mass effect field create a nuclear explosion?.. I think it's best not to think about it too long.

It doesn't. A kilotonne means litteraly "The energy here is equivalent to that of a thousand tonnes of TNT". So when the gunnery sergeant is talking about the slug hitting with 20 KT like the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he doesn't mean it explodes like a nuclear bomb he means it impacts with the same amount of energy as a nuclear bomb.


EDIT: Bum. Just realised there are five pages between that post and mine and someone will probably have already mentioned that.

Modifié par John Forseti, 03 février 2010 - 03:55 .

[raven2510]

How did this go to 5+ pages. Its answered on the first page. It basic physics.

[blank1]

I'll try my best to answer the OP, I guess.

The way linear abduction weapons function in the ME universe is by using a mass effect field to lower an object's mass, then propel it to extremely high velocities to give them kinetic kill power. The first thing someone who's taken Physics 101 will tell you is that momentum is conserved in a closed circuit universe, so the propelled object would lower in velocity when it exited the mass effect field. However, people assume that Mass Effect fields just lower an objects mass outright within the confines of a closed circuit universe, which cannot be true if it works like it does.

I'll propose a parallel analogy. They way people in the Warhammer 40K universe could travel FTL is by using the Warp, which is basically a different dimension. The way people in the Halo universe travel FTL is by entering into Slipstream Space, which is basically a different dimension. The way people travel FTL in the ME universe is by creating a mass effect field that lowers the mass of all objects inside the bubble, so that an equivalent amount of force has exponentially higher velocity. The trick is, that the mass effect field doesn't, or rather can't (Since it's never explained to behave like this), lower the literal mass of an object. Rather, it creates a bubble in space time, where the objects within the bubble have lower mass relative to objects outside the bubble, but all the objects retain equivalent mass relative to themselves, so a closed circuit universe still functions. It's basically the exact same "different universe where laws of physics are not the same" explanation, just more verbose.

Therefore, since its mass isn't being lowered outright, once it leaves the mass effect bubble and enters back into real space-time, it maintains its velocity since its momentum has been constant, but mass is added the moment it enters. This would work, but only because it's leaving abnormal space and entering into normal space.

Modifié par blank1, 03 février 2010 - 04:16 .