Future Weapons: ?Wait a minute, this is the future. Where are all the phaser guns?? ? Simon Phoenix

[Nimzabaat]

I have been playing Destiny and one thing that I find a little disappointing is the weaponry. A lot of Science Fiction films and games have weapons that are only as dangerous as the ones we have now. As such, I felt like talking about that for a bit.

Disclaimer: I liked most of these movies, I am only interested in pointing out that we need to be a bit more creative with our science fiction weaponry. Also, these are only my opinions and they may not align with yours.

Some Bad

Star Wars: Blasters in Star Wars turn out to be as effective as the projectile firearms we use, not even today, but at the time the film was made. They are actually less effective because every weapon fires the equivalent of tracer ammunition and tracers point both ways. Princess Leia is shown getting shot in the shoulder and it is only a minor injury. Lightsabers are pretty cool but, since Jedi seem to be awful at multi-tasking, a fully automatic weapon or area of effect is all you need. It is terribly convenient that nobody uses those in Star Wars. Don't even get me started on Stormtrooper armor, though I once had an idea of re-writing Star Wars and making the white Stormtrooper armor refractive so only a direct hit in a black area would hurt them.

Starship Troopers (the movies): Once again, it is the future and mankind has failed to come up with anything better than we have today. In fact they have lost a lot of technology we have like; mines, tanks, APCs, grenades, though they did get small nuclear weapons... which they should have used more often. I still think the book would have made an awesome movie though.

Some Good

Star Trek, TNG, DS9, Voyager (I normally don?t count Enterprise because it was outside of the Star Trek continuity): When Star Trek TNG debuted, they had phasers that fit in the palm of your hand and could do anything from stunning a single target to blowing the top off a mountain. Now that is a futuristic weapon! Then, well, they weren?t phallic enough so they had to make them bigger for? reasons. The larger phasers did not seem to do anything better than the smaller ones, nobody ever had to reload/recharge but people could not get behind a weapon that small. Anyways phasers are awesome and the only reason you would have to shoot someone twice is if you failed to set it properly.

District 9: When I think of futuristic weapons, I think of over-the-top damage. The ARC gun from District 9 is a great example of that. Only one person is ever shown getting wounded by this weapon and he loses his whole arm. It is just a flesh wound, but it is a lot of flesh. The Repeater shown in the movie is more like a standard firearm, but once again the damage seems to be much higher than most portable weapons that we have. Then there?s the magnetic/gravity weapon that can stop bullets and fire them back at people.

Men In Black: Two words: Noisy Cricket.

Aliens: The M41A Pulse Rifle is interesting because the firearms technology is basically the same as it is today, however the ammunition has advanced. The weapon uses 10mm explosive tipped caseless ammunition (unless you watch very carefully, but that is more of a prop issue). Now the M41A barely makes it in here because we have caseless ammunition technology and explosive rounds today. The smart guns used by Vasquez and Drake were pretty cool because they were set up on a steadicam rig with a smart targeting system. They never showed what any of the ammunition would do to a human, but the Xenomorphs are considerably more resilient and they exploded.

A Bit of Both

Guardians of the Galaxy: Guardians fits into both categories because some of the weapons were just like weapons we have now: A taser that works at a distance, numerous bladed weapons, mounted canons that appear to do less damage than a .50 caliber bullet (the Milano?s guns seemed to be pretty awesome until they showed them taking out the Sakaaran troops with them) and lastly the Hadron Enforcer that was basically a rocket launcher. On the other hand, the sentient arrow that Yondu used was pretty interesting (it even provided plot armor! well, plot stun-lock).

Predator/Predator 2/Predators: The Predators plasma caster fits into the bad category. It looks bad ass, and the three dot laser sight is iconic, but it is about as dangerous as a 7.62 mm bullet. It takes two to kill Blaine and Dutch shakes one off. It is also slow as molasses compared to, well, arrows even. Some other notable mentions are the collapsible spear (ooh look a spear!), the wrist claws (it takes the impact away from your wrist joint). Then again, in Predator 2 they had my favorite, the Smart Disc. That little disc weapon cut through a bunch of frozen cow carcasses and Gary Busey like they were nothing. It also seemed in tune with its users mental state and reacted accordingly, which was an interesting touch.

TLDR: What are some of your favorite/least favorite science fiction weapons? Do you have any ideas for some that you would like to share?

 

[Jack Action]

Re: Star Wars, blasters are hilariously even more useless than projectile weapons, because bullets can't be blocked by Jedi. Though according to the EU, most blasters have different power settings (maximum setting for a DC-15A, the garden-variety Clone Trooper assault rifle being able to punch 1-meter holes in concrete, theoretically).

Was going to point out that kinetic weapons are better, then I realized that wasn't the point of the thread, so I'll stick to the above.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Oh this...yeah, something overlooked a lot. If the new space gun isn't at least as good as the old firearm, why use it at all? Even if it is somewhat better, lots of people will stick to the guns they already have. Get this right in your story, or there will be ranting.

Star Trek phasers, yeah, good example of why you'd want one...at least the later ones, the TOS "phaser one"s could not be aimed.

Also of note are the Goa'uld weapons from Stargate. Rubbish, but later on in the series, O'Neill explains in great length why they are rubbish, and people should get firearms instead.

Aliens: The M41A Pulse Rifle is interesting because the firearms technology is basically the same as it is today, however the ammunition has advanced. The weapon uses 10mm explosive tipped caseless ammunition (unless you watch very carefully, but that is more of a prop issue). Now the M41A barely makes it in here because we have caseless ammunition technology and explosive rounds today. The smart guns used by Vasquez and Drake were pretty cool because they were set up on a steadicam rig with a smart targeting system. They never showed what any of the ammunition would do to a human, but the Xenomorphs are considerably more resilient and they exploded.

My main issue with the pulse rifles is that they supposedly hold 99 10mm rounds in those magazines. Um...ok.

Predator/Predator 2/Predators: The Predators plasma caster fits into the bad category. It looks bad ass, and the three dot laser sight is iconic, but it is about as dangerous as a 7.62 mm bullet. It takes two to kill Blaine and Dutch shakes one off. It is also slow as molasses compared to, well, arrows even. Some other notable mentions are the collapsible spear (ooh look a spear!), the wrist claws (it takes the impact away from your wrist joint). Then again, in Predator 2 they had my favorite, the Smart Disc. That little disc weapon cut through a bunch of frozen cow carcasses and Gary Busey like they were nothing. It also seemed in tune with its users mental state and reacted accordingly, which was an interesting touch.

Only as dangerous as a 7.62mm? Strongly disagree[footnote]Also, what 7.62mm do you mean? x51 NATO, or x39 like the AK47 uses or something else?[/footnote].

Blaine takes two because the first one clipped him. Even assuming it was from the same weapon (vaguely recall something about it supposedly being a different gun that's only used in that scene or something), the one that hit him straight on did a good job of killing him. Taking 2 hits to kill someone...a 7.62NATO round isn't guaranteed to instantly one shot people either.

If by "Dutch shakes one off" you mean that time the Predator shoots him through his M16/M203 just before he goes over the waterfall...well, the weapon absorbed most of the force, being cut in half in the process.

Having said that, it's slow moving, and obvious. Likewise, the laser sight thingy...sorta makes being invisible hard. The predator might be better off with a high powered rifle...but then it is hunting people for sport, maybe it's not a "military" weapon.

...

On a similar note, why does your Harry Potter or Twilight rip off Urban Fantasy series not have guns? Especially when it's invariably set in the US, where even people not charged with defending the world from monsters often are armed. If magic stops gunpowder working, fine, nobody uses gunpowder these days anyway, there are new propellants. If no propellants work, fine, people can make quite decent air guns, it's just firearms are better for most mortals. If airguns don't work, fine, flamethrowers are a good bet.

 

[Muspelheim]

I think the laser weapons from Warhammer 40K did somewhat solve the "if they aren't better, why bother?" problem a bit. They're not that much better than ordinary firearms, but the batteries can be recharged when they are drained. It's probably a bit more economic than to supply vast hordes of conscripts with real rounds that must be transported and accounted for.

The problem with laser weapons is that their perks aren't usually very well explored. The main benefit of a laser must be that it won't suffer from drop-off, have exceptional range and requires power rather than cartridges. But mostly, they're treated like exotic regular guns. I'd love a game where the laser rifle can either fire brief bursts at range or channel a continuous beam to the cost of rapid battery drain.

(Heh, I'd love a space fighting adventure where the heroes are still using weapons based on the Kalashnikov patterns.)

 

[Jack Action]

I think the laser weapons from Warhammer 40K did somewhat solve the "if they aren't better, why bother?" problem a bit. They're not that much better than ordinary firearms, but the batteries can be recharged when they are drained. It's probably a bit more economic than to supply vast hordes of conscripts with real rounds that must be transported and accounted for.

The problem with laser weapons is that their perks aren't usually very well explored. The main benefit of a laser must be that it won't suffer from drop-off, have exceptional range and requires power rather than cartridges. But mostly, they're treated like exotic regular guns. I'd love a game where the laser rifle can either fire brief bursts at range or channel a continuous beam to the cost of rapid battery drain.

Not necessarily true. A laser would have to be focused for the general range of whatever you're trying to hit, for maximum effectiveness. Which in itself would need a complex and very delicate system of lenses, and depending on whether it's pre-focused or not, a secondary ranging laser plus an associated computer to reset the lenses.

And while it wouldn't have drop-off, it would be influenced by changes in the medium it's fired through.

Far as power goes, a laser would need a lot of it, if you want it to create a small plasma explosion at the point of impact, instead of heating it up until it can melt through.

Really, you'd be better off with a rail or coilgun.

 

[Nickolai77]

The stormtroopers embody everything bad about sci-fi weaponry and tactics. I've never seen stormtrooper armour actually save a stormtrooper from death in any of the films and their idea of advancing on the enemy is to run towards them across open ground firing from the hip like they're bloody rambo. A platoon of vaguely competent imperial guardsmen could go to town on a battalion of stormtroopers.

Of course a lot more thought has gone into the weapons and tactics in the 40k universe because of the nature of the franchise. A space marine bolter is basically an uzi that fires explosive anti-tank rounds, and the variety of weapons wielded by the imperial guard is pretty interesting as well. I'm pretty surprised that the weaponry isn't that interesting in Destiny, given that it's a video game which is largely an FPS....

 

[Muspelheim]

Hmm, that is true. Lenses are one of those things that don't react well to battlefields in general, aren't they? It does sound like the only real application for lasers would be large turret structures, at best. Perhaps to destroy incoming space torpedoes.

Nah. Gauss it is, boys! Don't put them too close to the tape reels.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I think the laser weapons from Warhammer 40K did somewhat solve the "if they aren't better, why bother?" problem a bit. They're not that much better than ordinary firearms, but the batteries can be recharged when they are drained. It's probably a bit more economic than to supply vast hordes of conscripts with real rounds that must be transported and accounted for.

Yeah, was going to mention the humble lasgun. Also stated to be easier to maintain (for some reason) than the simple assault rifle (or autogun as 40k calls it), but both are commonly used, just the lasgun moreso.

The problem with laser weapons is that their perks aren't usually very well explored. The main benefit of a laser must be that it won't suffer from drop-off, have exceptional range and requires power rather than cartridges. But mostly, they're treated like exotic regular guns. I'd love a game where the laser rifle can either fire brief bursts at range or channel a continuous beam to the cost of rapid battery drain.

Very much this. Almost never talked about.

Where your muzzle is pointing is where the beam hits. Gravity doesn't matter, nor wind, or the rotation of the planet (admittedly this last one only matters to normal bullets at extreme ranges). You don't need a free floating barrel, you can rest it against things.

The Mk1 eyeball looks along a line parallel to the path of the beam, as long as the sights are set up right, if it is in your sights when you fire, you hit it.

Also, maximum range works differently. The beam doesn't stop, it widens...instead of missing, the energy is spread over a large area. Still heat up the target to an extent if you hit it, though at long ranges it might be harder to aim.

...

Oh, and that thing where you hold a mirror, and the shooter fires directly at it and not at any part of you which isn't behind your mirror? Yeah, won't work...if the mirror reflects, say, 90% of the beam, the remaining 10% is enough to quickly stop the mirror from reflecting 90%.

And trying to angle the mirror so the shooter hits themselves...good luck.

 

[carnex]

Screamers - Scavengers
Mechanical creature that moves at 10mp/h underground, capable of jumping out of it for 30feet distance and 7 feet of heigth and has rotating saw in front that almost instantly cuts through anything. And there are billions of them.

Now that's a futuristic nightmare scenario

Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy - Point of view Gun

Ultimate social engineering weapon. Shoot someone and target will automatically see everything from your point of view

Hyperion - death wand

Ultimate clean kill weapon. Upon beam touching target it instantly fries synapses in the brain. No exterior damage, no collateral damage, absolutely instantaneous, no chance of injury.

Hyperion - Millitary Assault rifle

Whole not ultimatelly awesome in any departpemnt it can
Shoot ballistic projectiles
Shoot Flachetes (thousands of micro steel or carbon rough projectiles) with adjustable spread
Shoot Laser beams
Shoot Plasma
Shoot focused Microwave radiation
and experimental version shoots subspace radiation

Can do anything, from taking down spacecraft to cooking you meal. All that with power source that will keep it going for roughly 25 years of warfare.

 

[Nimzabaat]

My main issue with the pulse rifles is that they supposedly hold 99 10mm rounds in those magazines. Um...ok.

Well the G11 Assault Rifle uses caseless ammunition and fits 50 rounds in a much smaller magazine than the pulse rifle. Caseless ammunition stacks a whole lot more neatly it seems. Also, the Calico SMG fits 100 rounds of 9 mm into a pretty compact magazine as well. It's not the most implausible thing.

On a similar note, why does your Harry Potter or Twilight rip off Urban Fantasy series not have guns? Especially when it's invariably set in the US, where even people not charged with defending the world from monsters often are armed. If magic stops gunpowder working, fine, nobody uses gunpowder these days anyway, there are new propellants. If no propellants work, fine, people can make quite decent air guns, it's just firearms are better for most mortals. If airguns don't work, fine, flamethrowers are a good bet.

I didn't write any Harry Potter rip-off and I was only really talking about science fiction weaponry, not fantasy.

I do not know much about Twilight but Harry Potter is easy. Firstly; the Harry Potter series takes place almost entirely in the UK where firearms are pretty rare. Secondly; the magic that they use in Harry Potter makes firearms obsolete. Keep in mind that the "shouting incantations" bit is for students and focus on what the teachers and Aurors can do. They have a stick that can kill twelve people in a single shot (Pettigrew), take over someone's mind (Voldemort, Harry Potter others), transfigure things (anybody), destroy entire bridges (Deather Eaters), alter weather (also Death Eaters), shield themselves and others (Dumbledore), the list goes on and on. Then they have invisible allies that suck the soul out of you and can't be defeated through mundane means. Why would anyone in the Wizarding world use a gun? Comedic relief? There's also a theory that since most Wizards weren't even aware of guns, that Wizard blood made you immune to normal injuries. After all, I am pretty sure that most of us are aware of anything that can kill us, so for something to be completely off the radar, it would have to be really harmless.

 

[Jack Action]

-snip-

The problem, though, is that it's exactly the fact that the beam spreads out over an area that makes it useless at longer ranges. It's less 'shotgun' and more 'sunburn instead of explosion'.

See, with a laser you've got two options:

1. Pump enough power into it that it flash-fries the outer layers of whatever it hits into a small amount of plasma (instant long-range explosion, very killy); this requires very precise beam focus -or a truly ridiculous amount of power, if you want to brute-force it-, and god help you if there's any distortion in the atmosphere between you and whatever you're trying to blow up.

2. Use a laser that slowly heats up the target until it can punch through the outer shell and fry something important inside (which is what the US did). Useful for shooting down missiles, possibly against fuel tanks, less so as an actual weapon, because you have to keep the beam focused on the same spot for a few seconds, if not more.

...don't even get me started on plasma weapons.

Hmm, that is true. Lenses are one of those things that don't react well to battlefields in general, aren't they? It does sound like the only real application for lasers would be large turret structures, at best. Perhaps to destroy incoming space torpedoes.

Nah. Gauss it is, boys! Don't put them too close to the tape reels.

Kinetic Weapons Master Race.

 

[Thaluikhain]

My main issue with the pulse rifles is that they supposedly hold 99 10mm rounds in those magazines. Um...ok.

Well the G11 Assault Rifle uses caseless ammunition and fits 50 rounds in a much smaller magazine than the pulse rifle. Caseless ammunition stacks a whole lot more neatly it seems. Also, the Calico SMG fits 100 rounds of 9 mm into a pretty compact magazine as well. It's not the most implausible thing.

The G11 ammunition is less than a quarter the area (the length of the pulse rifle rounds wasn't specified, only the diameter), though.

Isn't the Calico magazine not so much smaller, as less sticky-out? The overall weapon and mag has larger dimensions than a normal set up, but takes up less space, if you see what I mean.

I didn't write any Harry Potter rip-off and I was only really talking about science fiction weaponry, not fantasy.

I do not know much about Twilight but Harry Potter is easy. Firstly; the Harry Potter series takes place almost entirely in the UK where firearms are pretty rare. Secondly; the magic that they use in Harry Potter makes firearms obsolete. Keep in mind that the "shouting incantations" bit is for students and focus on what the teachers and Aurors can do. They have a stick that can kill twelve people in a single shot (Pettigrew), take over someone's mind (Voldemort, Harry Potter others), transfigure things (anybody), destroy entire bridges (Deather Eaters), alter weather (also Death Eaters), shield themselves and others (Dumbledore), the list goes on and on. Then they have invisible allies that suck the soul out of you and can't be defeated through mundane means. Why would anyone in the Wizarding world use a gun? Comedic relief? There's also a theory that since most Wizards weren't even aware of guns, that Wizard blood made you immune to normal injuries. After all, I am pretty sure that most of us are aware of anything that can kill us, so for something to be completely off the radar, it would have to be really harmless.

Well, I meant the generic "you", so many people keep following the same pattern.

Muggle born wizards should definitely know about guns, and they are in many ways much, much better than spells. Rowling herself even said so. Not heard the theory that wizards are immune to "normal" injuries...does that include being punched or stabbed?

I mostly give Harry Potter a free pass because it's aimed at least partly at kids and I happen to like it, though. Mortal Instruments or Vampire Academy...no, do better. OTOH, don't, they both had brief depictions of guns, and it's clear that the authors either don't know what they are talking about or is trolling me...a double barreled shotgun that you pump and that fires bullets? Ok, possible, but no...stop writing about guns.

The problem, though, is that it's exactly the fact that the beam spreads out over an area that makes it useless at longer ranges. It's less 'shotgun' and more 'sunburn instead of explosion'.

Sure...but between that you've got not enough to kill someone, but still enough to set many things on fire, which could be very useful.

Though, a bullet will still hit something beyond the range you can pick individual targets, which is useful, a aser can't do that.

 

[Jack Action]

Sure...but between that you've got not enough to kill someone, but still enough to set many things on fire, which could be very useful.

If your enemies still live in wooden cities, or forests, as a replacement for firebombing, sure. If you mean more of an extreme-range flamethrower kind of thing, though, I can't think of many people who'd use something like that. Would make white phosphorus look like Zippo lighter juice. It'd be banned pretty much instantly for use against living targets.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Sure...but between that you've got not enough to kill someone, but still enough to set many things on fire, which could be very useful.

If your enemies still live in wooden cities, or forests, as a replacement for firebombing, sure. If you mean more of an extreme-range flamethrower kind of thing, though, I can't think of many people who'd use something like that. Would make white phosphorus look like Zippo lighter juice. It'd be banned pretty much instantly for use against living targets.

Well...was more thinking along the lines of starting small fires at long range. Setting someone's clothes on fire, or igniting the bushes they are hiding behind, beyond effective small arms range could be handy.

But, all sorts of possibilities, yeah.

Also...even if it was banned, I'd imagine lots of people would ignore this ban. War crimes don't stop happening because they are crimes.

 

[Jack Action]

Well...was more thinking along the lines of starting small fires at long range. Setting someone's clothes on fire, or igniting the bushes they are hiding behind, beyond effective small arms range could be handy.

But, all sorts of possibilities, yeah.

Also...even if it was banned, I'd imagine lots of people would ignore this ban. War crimes don't stop happening because they are crimes.

Well, no, they don't, but if you've got something like the internet (and chances are you do if you're messing with lasers) and widely-available portable cameras, using prohibited weapons against living things is really bad for PR. Especially if people know how those weapons kill. You could try to sweep it under the rug, but if it gets out, you'll be bleeding support left and right, and there's a good chance it will get out.

Then again, there's been plenty of psycho civilizations in various sci-fi things.

Edit: also, any laser capable of igniting clothes will also ignite hair, roast skin and permanently burn retinas. It would actually be worse than a long-range flamethrower.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Well...was more thinking along the lines of starting small fires at long range. Setting someone's clothes on fire, or igniting the bushes they are hiding behind, beyond effective small arms range could be handy.

Then the fun part becomes how you hold a man-portable energy weapon on-target long enough to actually achieve that effect. Unless it's mounted on something or aimed by a computer, no human is going to be able to hold a rifle-sized laser weapon still enough to keep a pinhole-sized laser beam on anything more than a couple hundred meters away for long enough to get it to catch fire.

Plus, unless the target is doused in something flammible, it'll be easy to put out a fire started on their clothing. It might be distracting, and a second-degree burn is detrimental to someone's combat potential, but if you're looking to neutralize (kill) an enemy soldier with a laser then you've really got your work cut out for you.

 

[Jack Action]

Then the fun part becomes how you hold a man-portable energy weapon on-target long enough to actually achieve that effect. Unless it's mounted on something or aimed by a computer, no human is going to be able to hold a rifle-sized laser weapon still enough to keep a pinhole-sized laser beam on anything more than a couple hundred meters away for long enough to get it to catch fire.

Plus, unless the target is doused in something flammible, it'll be easy to put out a fire started on their clothing. It might be distracting, and a second-degree burn is detrimental to someone's combat potential, but if you're looking to neutralize (kill) an enemy soldier with a laser then you've really got your work cut out for you.

To be fair, you could get around this by simply pouring enough power into the laser that it does its job before your hands have time to shake.

Though really, if you've got the tech to do that, there's far easier (and less painful) ways to kill the other guy.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well...was more thinking along the lines of starting small fires at long range. Setting someone's clothes on fire, or igniting the bushes they are hiding behind, beyond effective small arms range could be handy.

Then the fun part becomes how you hold a man-portable energy weapon on-target long enough to actually achieve that effect. Unless it's mounted on something or aimed by a computer, no human is going to be able to hold a rifle-sized laser weapon still enough to keep a pinhole-sized laser beam on anything more than a couple hundred meters away for long enough to get it to catch fire.

Plus, unless the target is doused in something flammible, it'll be easy to put out a fire started on their clothing. It might be distracting, and a second-degree burn is detrimental to someone's combat potential, but if you're looking to neutralize (kill) an enemy soldier with a laser then you've really got your work cut out for you.

Well, yes and no.

No, in the sense that if the thing is a worthwhile weapon, it needs to be able to do all that and a lot more besides.

Yes, in the sense that that is a really big "if", and can I have a nice reliable AK74 instead?

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Voila: The ZF 1


Futuristic looking, compresses for easy carrying, and as for firepower... well Gary Oldman explains that better than I ever could.

 

[Nimzabaat]

-snip-

The problem, though, is that it's exactly the fact that the beam spreads out over an area that makes it useless at longer ranges. It's less 'shotgun' and more 'sunburn instead of explosion'.

See, with a laser you've got two options:

1. Pump enough power into it that it flash-fries the outer layers of whatever it hits into a small amount of plasma (instant long-range explosion, very killy); this requires very precise beam focus -or a truly ridiculous amount of power, if you want to brute-force it-, and god help you if there's any distortion in the atmosphere between you and whatever you're trying to blow up.

2. Use a laser that slowly heats up the target until it can punch through the outer shell and fry something important inside (which is what the US did). Useful for shooting down missiles, possibly against fuel tanks, less so as an actual weapon, because you have to keep the beam focused on the same spot for a few seconds, if not more.

...don't even get me started on plasma weapons.

Keep in mind that the YAL-1 Airborne laser is just the first step, with a range of over 300 km. Apparently the issues have already been mostly figured out (ish). The next step is miniaturization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YAL-1#Design

Another interesting development is this;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2739768/The-sports-car-runs-SALTWATER-Vehicle-goes-0-60mph-2-8-seconds-just-approved-EU-roads.html

Why would I put that in a post about future weapons? "It claims the technology offers five times the energy capacity of lithium-ion batteries of the same weight". As we know, advances in making smaller, more powerful batteries translates into more achievable directed energy weapons and even robotics.

It is interesting because there was a phase where we stopped believing in energy weapons. That's why they use projectile firearms in Aliens, Total Recall etc, it was more believable that we'd never figure out energy weapons at all. Now that we're getting closer to a future where hand held energy weapons become available, that should change.