These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Fiction

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Online lasers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Desuke Aramaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-06-04 01:33:55 UTC
I want a debate. True lasers or not ?
Rogue Lawyer
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2013-06-04 02:11:05 UTC
Desuke Aramaki wrote:
I want a debate. True lasers or not ?



Remember Eve is set well into the future, so the tech used should not be compared to the one of today.

Are they true lasers?

Laser stands for Light Amplification by the Stimulated Emission of Radiation. We encounter lasers everyday, such as a CD player which has lasers in it.

The lasers that the Amarr use are true lasers, only that they operate on vastly greater scale. Go on Youtube and look for a US Navy vid which shows the US Navy firing a laser at a drone and burning it while in flight. Now times that by a factor of millions and that is what the Amarr have.

The limit on current laser weapon use is that we have not yet developed a power out put that is powerful enough to produce a hot beam of light Eveonline style.
Cipher Deninard
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-06-04 08:56:38 UTC
I'm no scientist but as far as I know the Amarr lasers work the same way usual lasers would only on a far larger scale. The only thing I can see that is different is the fact that normal lasers aren't visible. So realistically you wouldn't see them until it affected the other ship somehow.

If anyone knows a reason why this wouldn't be true I'd love to hear it though :)
Naraish Adarn
Alexylva Paradox
#4 - 2013-06-04 09:58:55 UTC
since capsuleers use camera drones which can not only see said lasers but nebulae as well i suspect they are able to detect larger swathe of EM spectrum than our age old eyeball and visual cortex. that and pile on X layers of abstraction and visual adjustsments that make sense from machine-human interface point of view.
thus i suspect they shift and adjust the higher and lower ends of the visual spectrum to with in our visual range.
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-06-04 18:31:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Eija-Riitta Veitonen
Cipher Deninard wrote:
I'm no scientist but as far as I know the Amarr lasers work the same way usual lasers would only on a far larger scale. The only thing I can see that is different is the fact that normal lasers aren't visible. So realistically you wouldn't see them until it affected the other ship somehow.

If anyone knows a reason why this wouldn't be true I'd love to hear it though :)


Actually, lasers are pretty well visible in atmosphere due to air and dust particles scattering some of the beam: linky. Outer space, however, is an entirely different beast, there is no air there and the dust particles are so sparse they are nowhere enough to reflect enough of the beam for it to be visible.

This brings to point #2:
Naraish Adarn wrote:
since capsuleers use camera drones which can not only see said lasers but nebulae as well i suspect they are able to detect larger swathe of EM spectrum than our age old eyeball and visual cortex. that and pile on X layers of abstraction and visual adjustsments that make sense from machine-human interface point of view.
thus i suspect they shift and adjust the higher and lower ends of the visual spectrum to with in our visual range.

In space the general lighting conditions and contrast is much much higher and there is almost no ambient light scattering, so the shadows are very sharp and very dark, also because of no ambient light scattering the background nebulae and less bright stellar objects are more easily visible. Some nebulae, if in close proximity, could possibly be visible by a naked eye, and definitely can be visible with optical instruments, such as highly-sensitive cameras.

However, I, personally, think visible laser beams (that, and projectile/railgun trails) in space are nothing more than a visualization by ship's interface computers, much like the sounds are simulated.
Desuke Aramaki
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-06-06 02:00:31 UTC
In an EVE book, they wrote the following :


When the ship cleared for action, the bay would be opened to space, the emitter assembly would train outboard, and the powered ram would move the entire weapon outward until the emitter head cleared the hull and could bring up its gravity lenses safely. Honor had always been privately amused by the fact that modern energy weapons were "run out" like some echo of the muzzleloading cannon of Old Earth's sailing navies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Recoil does not make sense since lasers are phontons and photons dont have mass. So I doubt EVE ''lasers'' are true lasers.
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2013-06-06 03:19:42 UTC
Desuke Aramaki wrote:
In an EVE book, they wrote the following :


When the ship cleared for action, the bay would be opened to space, the emitter assembly would train outboard, and the powered ram would move the entire weapon outward until the emitter head cleared the hull and could bring up its gravity lenses safely. Honor had always been privately amused by the fact that modern energy weapons were "run out" like some echo of the muzzleloading cannon of Old Earth's sailing navies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Recoil does not make sense since lasers are phontons and photons dont have mass. So I doubt EVE ''lasers'' are true lasers.

Technically, while photons do not have idle mass, they still have momentum and energy, and thus exert forces surfaces they hit, albeit infinitesmall. Read up on radiation pressure if you do not believe me.

Regarding laser weapon recoil, there have been a long thread around eve-o forums some time ago, where people were discussing exactly why laser guns exhibit "recoil" effects on their barrels. I don't remember if any official CCP reply has been given, though. The most widely accepted theories include barrel retraction for improved cooling in-between shots or simply mode of operation of the focusing mechanisms.
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#8 - 2013-06-06 05:01:35 UTC
In the event EVE's lasers do actually function as a purely electromagnetic pulse weapon - putting aside those funky Tachyons, in other words - then I would suggest that the Laser Crystal ammunition is not actually a pure lensing system - i.e., something that receives a pre-produced laser frequency and somehow modulates it to the correct wavelength/frequency - but instead represents a replaceable lasing medium in a solid-state laser system, which would account for the sudden and rapid shift in apparent frequency.

But why the shift in effective range as well? I'd propose that the decreasing range with higher frequency is a result of a buildup of think molecular-level defects in the crystalline structure associated with exposure to high frequencies of radiation. This can effectively be controlled in standard (T1) crystals using the waste heat associated with firing to act as an annealing process on the crystal. Until those flaws are relieved, however, they may bend waves passing through them to produce out-of-coherence beams, reducing the range at which the beam is no longer damaging. In Faction and T2 crystals, the internal structures are to delicate to be endlessly subjected to this annealing process - they eventually degrade until a critical failure renders them useless.

The anomaly in the above theory is Multifrequency crystals. They don't seem to make sense in a number of ways - why does fluctuating the frequency cause more damage than a single, constant frequency, for one?

I'd propose that MF crystals act to deliver a "double hammer" of two major high-frequency pulses to a target; between these pulses, the system is cycled down to a longer-wavelength, lower-frequency emission to allow the entire system to cool somewhat and prevent greater damage to both crystal and laser pumping/housing apparatus. Going with the above theory about laser crystals actually being the lasing medium in a solid-state system, it is worth noting that some specific solid-state lasers are capable of being tuned between several different frequencies. Unfortunately, however, this kind of rapid frequency shift does not allow the defects to entirely anneal out and so produces even greater defects (and thus, decreased range) than a single, monofrequency pulse; they only fully clear when the entire system is shut off between shots.

The concept of crystalline defects associated with radiation, and the annealing as a relief method, is based on the real-life physics Wigner Effect.
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2013-06-06 07:43:00 UTC
Another idea why MF's frequency shifting effectively increases damage output is that whatever target's you're firing them at defences more easily adapt against a single-targeted wavelengths and thus spreading the spectrum a bit effectively negates this adaptive mechanism enough to gain a damage advantage for increased complexity. Why the drastic drop in effective range? Multiple frequencies in the same beam tend to interfere with each other, eventually leading to faster energy dissipation. Funny, it would be a cool idea for lasers to actually give not a "chance to miss" when outside optimal, but instead decreasing damage with full hit chance, this wouldn't really impact overall dps, but would give a nice twist to the weapon system.

And yes, i've always viewed frequency crystals as a gain medium rather than focusing optics components. I am overlooking the fact that beam lasers actually operate like pulse laser with only differences being greater alpha, optimal and falloff with reduced rate of fire and tracking, while instead, beam lasers by definition should provide a steady stream of damage (my guess is there is an engine limitation for this, as constant stream of damage would put a much greater strain on the system in larger battles than singular damage pulses).
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#10 - 2013-06-07 02:14:54 UTC
Eija-Riitta Veitonen wrote:
\
And yes, i've always viewed frequency crystals as a gain medium rather than focusing optics components. I am overlooking the fact that beam lasers actually operate like pulse laser with only differences being greater alpha, optimal and falloff with reduced rate of fire and tracking, while instead, beam lasers by definition should provide a steady stream of damage (my guess is there is an engine limitation for this, as constant stream of damage would put a much greater strain on the system in larger battles than singular damage pulses).


In modern terminology, the main difference between pulse and continuous beam laser operation has more to do with whether the energy is dumped in a single instant (pulsed) or allowed to continually be energized and dump over an extended time period (continuous). Even a continuous-wave laser system can (and typically are) operated in pulse-like cycles of operation on a larger timescale; the apparently pulse-like operation of Beam Lasers in EVE aren't terribly anomalous if we assume their firing duration is longer (producing a higher alpha) but accompanied by a further-extended cooldown period (i.e., cycle time).
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-06-07 03:58:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Eija-Riitta Veitonen
Esna Pitoojee wrote:
Eija-Riitta Veitonen wrote:
\
And yes, i've always viewed frequency crystals as a gain medium rather than focusing optics components. I am overlooking the fact that beam lasers actually operate like pulse laser with only differences being greater alpha, optimal and falloff with reduced rate of fire and tracking, while instead, beam lasers by definition should provide a steady stream of damage (my guess is there is an engine limitation for this, as constant stream of damage would put a much greater strain on the system in larger battles than singular damage pulses).


In modern terminology, the main difference between pulse and continuous beam laser operation has more to do with whether the energy is dumped in a single instant (pulsed) or allowed to continually be energized and dump over an extended time period (continuous). Even a continuous-wave laser system can (and typically are) operated in pulse-like cycles of operation on a larger timescale; the apparently pulse-like operation of Beam Lasers in EVE aren't terribly anomalous if we assume their firing duration is longer (producing a higher alpha) but accompanied by a further-extended cooldown period (i.e., cycle time).

Yes, that is true, but still, continuous-stream beam lasers would be frikkin' awesome, right?

However, both modes of operation physically should have different effects on the target: pulse has significantly higher energy concentration, but only lasts for a very short period, allowing for exceptional accuracy and should have a piercing effect, like a light bullet, whereas beams have more of a slicing effect due to beam's origin and or target movement during combat. Pulses should be able to punch holes in very thick and well-protected targets for some localized but nonetheless significant damage if aimed well, while beams slice through more vulnerable areas causing severe structural damage to them.

Lasers: the swiss army knife of a weapon!
Axel Kurki
Aseyakone
#12 - 2013-06-07 10:20:56 UTC
I think at one point (just after Trinity?) a combination of hull bonuses and enough heat sinks would produce a continuous beam. At least I do remember reading some patch notes that this was "fixed". (Probably something like tachyons on an Armageddon.)
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#13 - 2013-06-08 00:28:27 UTC
Eija-Riitta Veitonen wrote:

Yes, that is true, but still, continuous-stream beam lasers would be frikkin' awesome, right?


Yes, they certainly would be...

Funny story: as a fresh noob, I was told by the IAC corp chat that the difference between pulse and beam lasers was one was higher DPS, while the other was intermittent high-alpha; critically, I was not told which was which. I naturally went out and spent all my money on a pair of meta 4 frigate beams thinking they were a constant-DPS, continuous fire weapon. I was most disappointed when they actually appeared to perform worse against the frigate rats I was fighting, and were most definitely not continuous-beam.