1337mokro said:
I get the feeling your getting a bit arrogant and obtuse here (I AM A SCIENTIST! field of specialty classified). I may not be a physicist but radiation has no fucking thing to do with the heat I am talking about.
Sorry. I'm not saying you have to be scientific.
Heat diminishes because it "radiates" out to the environment. Heat, as in the energy we call heat is actually only transferable between matter. Heat does not "radiate" away, it is passed on to other particles, there is electromagnetic radiation generated by a source of heat sure but that heat is basically the green glow you get from the blast from the made up plasma rifles and that warm fuzzy feeling you get from it. So out of the three main ways of heat transferal the only one that remains is electromagnetic radiation which is a fairly low amount of energy lost in comparison to how it would behave on earth.
Hmm, I can't continue this discussion in any scientific terms as that is just wrong.
Your Kinetic energy argument utterly fails because it is so effective in space. The kinetic energy itself has shit all to do with the damage inflicted. The design of the bullet has all to do with it. If I launch a regular bullet in space it will pass straight through you inflicting minimal damage because it is moving at such a high speed without friction slowing it down. Now would you fire a specialized bullet intent on shredding the hull. Fine. Or you could shoot a super-heated ball of plasma at it that melts the hull plating, overheats their systems, burns circuitry and of course just looks awesome.
That kind of attitude is against forum rules and is also not true.
And I'll add that nothing stops the projectile being a projectile of thermite, so it penetrates very well AND creates heat damage if heat damage is so needed.
I thought we were talking about shooting through the vacuum of space? Where is the oxygen to burn?
If oxygen is around to burn, then I raise you incendiary bullets. Really nasty stuff.
Though best of all, 20mm auto-cannon shells. Now THOSE will FUBAR [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_slang_terms#FUBAR] and there are even shotgun sized versions for hand portable explosive destruction. Oh and of course, 40mm grenades. They'll work great in space if you are firing from within an orbit there won't be any influence of gravity in your frame of reference.
And most of this is 20th century technology, there is so much more room for improvement.
Firearms rule!
Though I would challenge you to put your hypothesis of Melt vs Tear to the test. Get a sheet of metal and Tear it. Now repair it. Get a sheet of metal and Melt a hole in it. Now repair it. You are a SCIENTIST after all. You should be well aware with testing your claims.
I would have thought a SCIENTIST would have been able to separate hypothetical discussions and speculation from magic. Despite me never once attempting to even explain the way my imaginary plasma gun would work, merely stating that as plasma acts like a liquid a vortex could be used to channel it into a direction and the effects of the gun on matter, you equate this somehow to me pulling a "It's magic" explanation out of my ass?
Bad form. Especially for a SCIENTIST.
A hole is easily fixed. Spot weld a plate over it or if narrow enough just get your welding torch, melt a bead and drop it in the hole. Molten steel has a very high surface tension, it'll stick around it.
A split rivet or weld seam. You need to cut out the split and then re-do it from scratch.
"Despite me never once attempting to even explain"
But
" merely stating that as plasma acts like a liquid a vortex could be used to channel it into a direction and the effects of the gun"
Is kind of an explanation.
you equate this somehow to me pulling a "It's magic" explanation
Did I say that about what you said? I don't remember that. I certainly didn't intend that.
Anyway, I think we are getting off on the wrong foot, perhaps it's best we drop it here? I never meant to imply anything about you nor I.