PDA

View Full Version : On how gauss weapons work



Sekhmet
15-10-2007, 16:37
References are from the Necron codex.

Facts
Gauss weapons break down a target at the sub-atomic level and gravitate them towards the gun.
They're best described as linear induction motors.
They appear to create a focus bipolar magnetic field when fired.
The beam strips a target to its constituent atoms.

Inferred facts
Smaller gauss weapons do not fully penetrate a human-sized target until it's basically stripped of atoms
Larger gauss weapons (such as the gauss cannon) will punch straight through both sides of a land raider


Discussion
So how does a gauss effect work against its intended target?
Well it breaks the target's layers down at the sub-atomic level. That's protons, neutrons and electrons, basically. Breaking proton/neutron bonds would be somewhat... explosive... (fission) and it does say "stripped of atoms", not "stream of hydrogen", so we can safely assume that gauss weapons strip electrons off of atoms. As the electrons are removed, molecules fall apart and frankly release a lot of energy (fire). As there are no hydrogen or oxygen gas molecules (everything is a single atom), you won't actually see a flame... just a lot of heat.

The situation now is that you have a large mass of positively charged single atom ions. Gauss weapons appear to create a magnetic field, and the molecules were observed to travel toward the weapon, so... the weapon focusing point (or collection bin or whatever) must act as the cathode (negative) while the body acts as the anode (positive). As this happens, the free atoms, which are basically a plasma, move directly toward the weapon at whatever speed dictated by the strength of the cathode. But wait... what about the stripped electrons? We have a name for stripped electrons not in a vacuum. Beta radiation. The free electrons will be pushed in the opposite direction as the atoms... deeper into the target. Theoretically, if you fired a gauss weapon for a long amount of time in perfectly straight line through a lot of material, the beam that finally exits the other side will have a GIGANTIC negative charge at the leading edge.


The next thing to be discussed is the destroyer vs land raider issue. The Ad Mech noted that the power requirements for a weapon to punch through two sides of a land raider without deflection would require a generator mounted to a titan or starship. But Necrons, in general, want to harvest and not simply utterly destroy. So why would a destroyer punch through the land raider instead of vaporizing it slowly? Using the power requirements and the results of the picture as evidence, the only explanation I can see is that destroyers were not intended to attack battle tanks. They were intended to attack titans.

Why not send a titan to kill a titan? Just look at a warhound titan. It has no defensive weapons, just primary weapons. Same with the Eldar revenant, and most all super-heavy tanks. Do you think they could hit what's basically a jetbike? How about a dozen of them? Then can move in all 3 axis and at very high speeds. We know the Necrons possess inertia-less technology, could a similar adaption exist on a destroyer to allow impossible changes in direction and speed? But we'd have to assume the destroyer is meant as a small titan or super-heavy tank killer, because what would a heavy destroyer be used for? Imperator-class or maybe even larger. It seems mantas would be a modern target of opportunity for a heavy destroyer.

Then.. what about Necron titans like the aeonic orb? These would be weapons created to destroy not one target at a time, but many. Armies. Cities in the case of some.


We can now infer that gauss weapons have a power setting (obviously) that determines how much mass is removed over a given time. But if too much power is used, the beam simply eats away material too fast and punches a hole instead of completely vaporizing the target.

We know from articles of people surviving gauss shots that, well, it's survivable. That means even if a gauss flayer can sometimes completely flay you, sometimes it doesn't. If the beam could fire continuously until a target is dead, you wouldn't really see any survivors. Since in the game the weapons fire as bursts, we can combine that with the fluff articles to infer that in the fluff, gauss also fires as a relatively short burst. A burst of beams of course, not individual packets of gauss goodness. The burst removes a set amount of atomic material, but depending on where it hits, it may only remove a certain amount. For example, hitting a human's extended arm probably won't kill him, just remove the arm.

And if you survive a gauss wound, you'll have to be treated for burns (probably 1st or 2nd degree only) and radiation poisoning. As well as losing skin or limbs.


What I don't know is.. why would gauss weapons draw the raw atomic material back into the weapon? I don't think C'tan eat that. One hypothesis is that it's used for power... either for the weapon or the Necrons themselves. But that would create a situation where missing or using a gun too big for your target wastes energy. Another hypothesis is that it's a feature created entirely to destroy Necrons, and specifically... living metal. After beating the Old Ones the first time, who were the biggest threat? Other C'tan. So, foreseeing this, someone probably installed the ability to not only destroy a target at the sub-atomic level, but to also pull those resources away from your target, so it couldn't use them to rebuild itself with nano machines. That, I think, makes the most sense.



Anyway, I'm not claiming this is 100% correct... but it's probably close.

Rodman49
15-10-2007, 17:02
Wow, interesting read, I don't have anything to add but certainly worth reading if you like or are interested in Necron fluff.

malika
15-10-2007, 17:20
I always assumed the Gauss weapon works like a tractor beam, pulling the molecules towards it but at a certain point it simply lets the molecules go and they are released.

As for the Necron harvesting, I always assumed the Necrons only harvested lifeforms for their C'tan masters, the essence of lifeforms is basicly food for their Star Gods. Are the Necrons still producing new weapons and such or are they simply using the stuff they have from all those millions of years ago?


But off topic:

BTW, I think you might be interested in this...you should check out the Anargo Sector Project (link to forum in my sig), we try to work out the 40k universe in more detial/realism. Necrons have a historical part in our project and well...could still use people interested in that :) Also background fans who are interested in a challenge...you seem to fit the bill :)

The Guy
15-10-2007, 17:32
Great hypothesis!
I always thought that Gauss weapons drew in the SOUL of their victim, this goes hand in hand with the whole harvester thing and perhaps the souls are stored inside the weapon and used as A. energy suply for the necron or B. Give to the C'tan to devour [why kill something if the C'tan won't get it's food from it?] This could also explain the atoms being pulled in. As the soul is pulled in then so are more material part of the body. And also a land raider has no soul so the beam would go straight through? I don't think gauss weapons should be rapid fire IMO more assault 1. Perhaps they draw these atoms in because each gauss weapon contains a tiny, but still incredibly powerful, portion of living metal or a certain C'tan inside that draw it in? Just my opinion. :)

Sekhmet
15-10-2007, 18:09
Guy with the jammed torch - Necrons never deal with the soul, with the exception of Pariahs which deal with the lack of a soul. Necron tech never touches the spiritual/warp side of anything except to block it. C'tan don't eat souls either.

malika - according to fluff, gauss weapons break down the target at the sub-atomic (not molecular) level, then draw it towards the gun. I think my explanation is better than a "tractor beam" because it makes sense according to the fluff more than a tractor beam does (do we have any examples of that in 40k?)

malika
15-10-2007, 18:38
I never knew a gauss weapon sucked the material (on sub atomic level) inside itself though...

As for the tractorbeam weapon, if I remember correctly the Conversion Beamer does exactly that.

Gorbad Ironclaw
15-10-2007, 18:55
Orks also employ a large array of different tractor beams. They used to have one as a field gun, and it's also how they capture space hulks and the like.

Sekhmet
15-10-2007, 19:13
Lifta Droppas!

azimaith
15-10-2007, 20:05
The other options for separating subatomic particles would be to either(If I remember correctly)
A: Smashing them with another subatomic particle IE Supercollider.
B: Energizing them so much that the electrons hop out of orbit. IE: Neon lights.

Since A wouldn't really "Flay" someone its out. But B is a possibility too. My biggest problem with your explanation is the idea that you can separate protons and neutrons by just pulling them with the beam essentially. If you were to pull it that hard why wouldn't the atoms, which were electron bonded to one another (which you removed) simply separate toward the gun? When we talk about fission were generally talking about bashing open an atoms nucleus with a neutron followed by a pool table like effect.

I'd see it as energizing the atoms to the point where the electrons jumped out of their orbit then sucking them up with the ion remnants. After all, once all the electrons are gone you essentially have a negative particle(s) and a positive one (the nucleus).

Now if theres one thing i've learned from my classes in X-ray technology is that just because it appears to be a "beam" doesn't mean its actually a straight line. The simplest answer is that the center or "hard" part of the gauss ray simply is more energetic thus energises electrons faster allowing for a cone shaped impact. (the softer edges being from the weaker "scatter" allowing to bore through something. Naturally the harder a substances is(stronger their electron bonds are) the slower they will be removed (if at all!) by the weaker beam. So the landraider could simply be losing very little or nothing from the external parts of the beam while the center bores through in a straight line while a human with relatively weak bonds is flayed quickly.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v94/azimaith/gaussbeam.jpg

The top shows how you might see the beam visually, the bottom is what I think the beam is really like (and not so much a beam but a cone) and its color coded, green being strongest, then orange, then yellow. It explains wide angle flaying and why it doesn't flay vehicles like humans.

Furthermore the idea that the electrons are not taken but rather excited out of orbit supports the copius quantities of light we see from gauss victims at the time of irradiation. They are being energized to the point of atomic break down which will generate not only heat, but light (like a neon tube). (Which interestingly enough is very similar to what gauss flayer tubes look like.)

Sekhmet
15-10-2007, 21:30
My biggest problem with your explanation is the idea that you can separate protons and neutrons by just pulling them with the beam essentially. If you were to pull it that hard why wouldn't the atoms, which were electron bonded to one another (which you removed) simply separate toward the gun? When we talk about fission were generally talking about bashing open an atoms nucleus with a neutron followed by a pool table like effect.


I'm not saying gauss weapons separate protons from neutrons, I'm saying they stay together. I'm saying the electrons are stripped off in some way and the atoms, minus the electrons, are pulled towards the weapon.

Stella Cadente
15-10-2007, 22:28
my biggest problem with Necron Gauss weapons, is that there not even close to being Gauss weapons, but thats GW's problem for getting the name wrong

Shiakou
15-10-2007, 23:13
Whoa, nice theory Sekhmet. Mind if I use it for my Dark Crusade fanfic? I was always wondering why the Necrons in the game were so underpowered.

Sekhmet
15-10-2007, 23:37
my biggest problem with Necron Gauss weapons, is that there not even close to being Gauss weapons, but thats GW's problem for getting the name wrong

Yeah... should've call the thread "On how Necron 'Gauss' weapons work".

Shiakou, go ahead. It's just a bunch of theories after all. :D

Noserenda
15-10-2007, 23:47
Now i havent read through the details in the Current codex, but remembering the original WD article Necrons came in on, it states that Gauss weaponry uses teleporter based technology to "flay" victims apart, often in less than a second.

Thats also an original source of the impossible power requirements, as the most efficient Imperial Teleporters are ship based and often fill vast areas, wheras a Gauss flayer is gun sized.

Its also the source of the name, a tech priest Named Gauss had done extensive Teleporter research or something.

As for punching through the Land raider, id assume it didnt do it in one fell swoop, more that it took X nanoseconds to go through one facing, no appreciable time to go across the empty transport section and them another few nanoseconds to come out the other side, nigh on instantaneous yes but not a clean overkill.

And refering to gun stats briefly, while a Heavy Destroyers cannon is indeed S10 and highly nasty compared to any smaller vehicle, it lacks any of the greater punch of Titan killer of SD to be _designed_ to kill titans, anymore than a rail gun or demolisher is anyhow.

Green-is-best
15-10-2007, 23:51
my biggest problem with Necron Gauss weapons, is that there not even close to being Gauss weapons, but thats GW's problem for getting the name wrong

So true! I looked up Gauss weapons on Google and they're railguns! WTF GW? :wtf:

Anyway, nice write up, Sekhmet. It reminds me of the Conversion Beamer of yore. Perhaps Gauss Flayers work in the same way: they convert the energy locked in the atomic and sub-atomic bonds of their targets into energy and then use a magnetic field to contain and transport that energy back to the 'Cron. Maybe that's where they get their power from...

(Off topic, where's your avatar from, Sekhmet?)

GodHead
16-10-2007, 02:10
Gauss weapons aren't railguns. Railguns use the projectile itself to complete an electric circuit, which generates an incredibly strong, brief linear magnetic field. It is the projectiles own magnetic field which propels it.

Gauss weapons run an electric current through a tight coil around the projectile to create a magnetic field. The projectile for a Gauss weapon must be magnetic and its magnetic field interacts with the coils and is propelled like a mag-lev train. For this reason they are often referred to as coilguns.

Railguns are potentially more powerful and energy effecient than coilguns, because all of the energy is directed parallel to the motion of the projectile, rather than pulling it equally to the sides. The problem with railguns is the incredible friction generated by the projectile sliding down the rails themselves.

empireguard
16-10-2007, 02:13
Ok I’m just going to correct you on a few things.

Saying “striped of atoms” would mean that even thought they “break it down at the sub-atomic level” they do not break it down to the sub-atomic level. Say they would split a Carbon into two 2 lithium atoms, this can be done by firing neutrons at the target. It could also just be that they break chemical bonds, as this would happen at the sub-atomic level, though again not result in something changing to the sub-atomic level.

Hydrogen and oxygen do not make a flame in fact it’s the small impurities that give flame it’s colour mainly sodium. This is why ethanol fires are so dangerous they are almost invisible due to the lack of Impurities

Proton are not considered Hydrogen atoms

It would not require a large magnetic field to move positively charged ions, as they them would very quickly be attracted to anything Negative. It may not even require a magnetic field at all. As air would resit the flow of these partials its possible that charging the air itself would be required. Also remember that the air would also be affected by these weapons so the air may be charged naturally.

Striped electrons that come from a Neutron turning into a proton is know as Alpha radiation (which can not even penetrate a piece of paper). Free electrons are know as a static charge this is easily dissipated into the ground

You would not need to be treated for radiation poisoning, as there would be no radioactive material left in you body.


EDIT: It possible that Gauss weapons work by inducing a charge on Neutrons firing them at a target. This would sub atomically break up any atom that the Neutrons hit into smaller atoms (including the air it passes though) at the same time releasing large amount of energy by doing so (as this is a fission reaction). These Neutrons would have to be slow moving in order for this to happen.

The Gauss weapon could then in some way attract the atoms that broke of (either magnetically or by some kind of tractor beam) back to the gun. Once this is done the Gun may have some method of reversing alpha decay creating more neutrons to be fired again thereby refilling the gun after every shot. Meaning it never runs out of ammunition and only requires energy to run which could be could easily be produced by this very process.

Sekhmet
16-10-2007, 03:19
Now i havent read through the details in the Current codex, but remembering the original WD article Necrons came in on, it states that Gauss weaponry uses teleporter based technology to "flay" victims apart, often in less than a second.

Hm.. I'll have to check that article later. I don't remember it ever being teleporter technology though.



Thats also an original source of the impossible power requirements, as the most efficient Imperial Teleporters are ship based and often fill vast areas, wheras a Gauss flayer is gun sized.

Its also the source of the name, a tech priest Named Gauss had done extensive Teleporter research or something.

That sounds suspiciously like the codex's article on massive power requirements. Tech priests naming things after themselves is ridiculous! First the priest "Land" finds the "Raider" and "Speeder"... then this priest names all Necron weapons after himself! Ridiculous!



As for punching through the Land raider, id assume it didnt do it in one fell swoop, more that it took X nanoseconds to go through one facing, no appreciable time to go across the empty transport section and them another few nanoseconds to come out the other side, nigh on instantaneous yes but not a clean overkill.

It always takes x nano/mili seconds for a weapon to penetrate anything. Nothing is ever a "clean overkill". Even a depleted uranium Sabot anti-tank round takes X amount of time to go through an unarmored person.



And refering to gun stats briefly, while a Heavy Destroyers cannon is indeed S10 and highly nasty compared to any smaller vehicle, it lacks any of the greater punch of Titan killer of SD to be _designed_ to kill titans, anymore than a rail gun or demolisher is anyhow.
Heavy Destroyers aren't S10 and using the game to back up fluff is wrong, especially in the case of Necrons. I did it, but I think I mentioned it was a bad idea.



Ok I’m just going to correct you on a few things.

Saying “striped of atoms” would mean that even thought they “break it down at the sub-atomic level” they do not break it down to the sub-atomic level. Say they would split a Carbon into two 2 lithium atoms, this can be done by firing neutrons at the target. It could also just be that they break chemical bonds, as this would happen at the sub-atomic level, though again not result in something changing to the sub-atomic level.

That's what I'm saying... they're breaking chemical bonds as well as stripping electrons. Breaking down to the sub-atomic level would cause fission. Not necessarily a chain reaction, but it would cause fission.



Hydrogen and oxygen do not make a flame in fact it’s the small impurities that give flame it’s colour mainly sodium. This is why ethanol fires are so dangerous they are almost invisible due to the lack of Impurities

Hydrogen and oxygen are required for an open flame. Period.



Proton are not considered Hydrogen atoms

By definition, a proton without an electron or a neutron is a hydrogen ion.



It would not require a large magnetic field to move positively charged ions, as they them would very quickly be attracted to anything Negative. It may not even require a magnetic field at all. As air would resit the flow of these partials its possible that charging the air itself would be required. Also remember that the air would also be affected by these weapons so the air may be charged naturally.

The weapon would "flay" the air particles as it hit them, pulling them towards the weapon as the "bow" of the beam travels through space. Mind you this is happening ridiculously fast. I just kind of assumed that was obvious in my description, but I realize now that I totally skimmed over it.



Striped electrons that come from a Neutron turning into a proton is know as Alpha radiation (which can not even penetrate a piece of paper). Free electrons are know as a static charge this is easily dissipated into the ground

Alpha radiation is a helium nucleus without electrons. Free electrons in general is known as electricity. Free high energy electrons are known as beta radiation.



EDIT: It possible that Gauss weapons work by inducing a charge on Neutrons firing them at a target. This would sub atomically break up any atom that the Neutrons hit into smaller atoms (including the air it passes though) at the same time releasing large amount of energy by doing so (as this is a fission reaction). These Neutrons would have to be slow moving in order for this to happen.

The Gauss weapon could then in some way attract the atoms that broke of (either magnetically or by some kind of tractor beam) back to the gun. Once this is done the Gun may have some method of reversing alpha decay creating more neutrons to be fired again thereby refilling the gun after every shot. Meaning it never runs out of ammunition and only requires energy to run which could be could easily be produced by this very process.
Using neutrons as a weapon isn't something sci-fi, it's done in a weapon called, obviously enough, a Neutron Bomb. Firstly, the Neutrons would have to be moving extremely quickly in order for them to break apart an atom. Simply firing a neutron at a nucleus won't do anything. As we can see with a Neutron Bomb, all it does is kill people, it does absolutely nothing to inanimate objects. Your second paragraph doesn't make any sense.

Noserenda
16-10-2007, 03:39
That sounds suspiciously like the codex's article on massive power requirements. Tech priests naming things after themselves is ridiculous! First the priest "Land" finds the "Raider" and "Speeder"... then this priest names all Necron weapons after himself! Ridiculous!

He didnt name them after himself, some principle or other he developed relating to Teleporters is called the "Gauss Theorem" or somesuch and the weapons use that principle, thus the name.



It always takes x nano/mili seconds for a weapon to penetrate anything. Nothing is ever a "clean overkill". Even a depleted uranium Sabot anti-tank round takes X amount of time to go through an unarmored person.


Obviously, but my point was (Although possibly badly expressed) that it wasnt going clean through like a bullet goes through paper, it was pushing through like a spear through meat, its less the initial "hit" doing the damage, more the fact that constant force is being applied and so it continues to push through.



Heavy Destroyers aren't S10 and using the game to back up fluff is wrong, especially in the case of Necrons. I did it, but I think I mentioned it was a bad idea.

Ofc its a bad idea, but its often the only recourse when your sources consist of the Codex going WTFPWN and little else... Especially when you are trying to apply real science to what was designed by a bunch of guys sitting around deciding what looked cool and different while sounding interesting...

The Heavy gauss cannon is clearly not an anti titan weapon because its crap at killing titans. This is especially true when you consider the Pylon, which obviously IS an Anti Super Heavy weapon, and which would be utterly redundant if Heavy Destroyers stood a decent chance of killing titans and the Ctan clearly hate redundancy and variety :rolleyes:

Sekhmet
16-10-2007, 05:07
The Heavy gauss cannon is clearly not an anti titan weapon because its crap at killing titans. This is especially true when you consider the Pylon, which obviously IS an Anti Super Heavy weapon, and which would be utterly redundant if Heavy Destroyers stood a decent chance of killing titans and the Ctan clearly hate redundancy and variety :rolleyes:

Again, you really can't apply in-game stats to the fluff. If a regular destroyer can penetrate a Land Raider so easily, why doesn't it in-game?

If C'tan are never phased "in" until just before striking with a physical attack, then why don't they have a 1+/1+ invul save against shooting and a 2+ invul save in close combat? Why aren't C'tan actually gods in the game? Why are they so underpowered?

Because of game balance. That's why you can't compare in-game stats to the fluff, balance! So because a heavy gauss cannon in game is not anti-titan doesn't mean it's that way in the fluff. I'm actually 99.9999% certain that most Necron units would be 2-3 times more expensive if they represented the fluff... which would make an extremely small army in 40k.

empireguard
16-10-2007, 05:09
That's what I'm saying... they're breaking chemical bonds as well as stripping electrons. Breaking down to the sub-atomic level would cause fission. Not necessarily a chain reaction, but it would cause fission.


You listed the Fact “Gauss weapons break down a target at the sub-atomic level” meaning they don’t have to be broken down to a sub-atomic level

So you meant striping electrons from Neutrons? I read it as from the atom it’s self. If you were to strip Neutrons of their electrons then the result is more likely to cause Alpha decay to stabilise the Atom, than fission.



Hydrogen and oxygen are required for an open flame. Period.


Sorry that not true http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame



By definition, a proton without an electron or a neutron is a hydrogen ion.


Yes its true a proton without an electron is the most common hydrogen ion. However its only one of three, one neutron and one proton joined is classed as a hydrogen ion and two neutrons and one proton joined is also classed as a hydrogen ion. This is why the two word “Proton” and “Hydrogen Ion” are never used interchangeably, in the scientific community.



Alpha radiation is a helium nucleus without electrons. Free electrons in general is known as electricity. Free high energy electrons are known as beta radiation.


Opps I got that mixed around the wrong way my bad.


Using neutrons as a weapon isn't something sci-fi, it's done in a weapon called, obviously enough, a Neutron Bomb. Firstly, the Neutrons would have to be moving extremely quickly in order for them to break apart an atom. Simply firing a neutron at a nucleus won't do anything. As we can see with a Neutron Bomb, all it does is kill people, it does absolutely nothing to inanimate objects. Your second paragraph doesn't make any sense.

Sorry again but they have to be moving slow for fission to occur http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission. All fast moving Neutron do is kill people and do less damage to inanimate objects

I was talking about this Fission reaction causing atoms to vaporise from the surface of the tank or person. These atoms (which would be very hot and full of energy having just under gone a fission reaction) could then be pulled into the Gauss weapon by a tractor beam back into the gun. Then the heat could be turned in to energy and the atoms all turned in to Neutrons. Starting the process again.

Sekhmet
16-10-2007, 05:33
You listed the Fact “Gauss weapons break down a target at the sub-atomic level” meaning they don’t have to be broken down to a sub-atomic level

So you meant striping electrons from Neutrons? I read it as from the atom it’s self. If you were to strip Neutrons of their electrons then the result is more likely to cause Alpha decay to stabilise the Atom, than fission.

Electrons from nuclei, you do know the difference right?



Yes its true a proton without an electron is the most common hydrogen ion. However its only one of three, one neutron and one proton joined is classed as a hydrogen ion and two neutrons and one proton joined is also classed as a hydrogen ion. This is why the two word “Proton” and “Hydrogen Ion” are never used interchangeably, in the scientific community.

proton + neutron = deuterium, a hydrogen isotope, proton + 2 neutron = tritium, also a hydrogen isotope. If they didn't have 1 electron, they'd be isotopes and ions, however.



Sorry again but they have to be moving slow for fission to occur http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission. All fast moving Neutron do is kill people and do less damage to inanimate objects

Neutrons move from about 9900 km/h (0.009C) to 0.07C to create fission. That's pretty fast if you ask me.



I was talking about this Fission reaction causing atoms to vaporise from the surface of the tank or person. These atoms (which would be very hot and full of energy having just under gone a fission reaction) could then be pulled into the Gauss weapon by a tractor beam back into the gun. Then the heat could be turned in to energy and the atoms all turned in to Neutrons. Starting the process again.
A Fission reaction in anything smaller than lead is nearly impossible. And turning an entire person into what's basically a fission bomb would be very explosive, something that the fluff does not support at all.

Noserenda
16-10-2007, 06:18
Again, you really can't apply in-game stats to the fluff. If a regular destroyer can penetrate a Land Raider so easily, why doesn't it in-game?

Because of game balance. That's why you can't compare in-game stats to the fluff, balance! So because a heavy gauss cannon in game is not anti-titan doesn't mean it's that way in the fluff. I'm actually 99.9999% certain that most Necron units would be 2-3 times more expensive if they represented the fluff... which would make an extremely small army in 40k.

Ok so ignoring all biased or balance based issues we still have the existence of the Pylon, a fixed Anti Titan/Air platform. Why would Necrons use them if their light attack skimmers could reliably cope with Super Heavy or Titan class opponents?

Logically therefore, they cant.

As for C'tan, im actually of the opinion they are rather well represented in 40k, they are extremely powerful beings, but as much gods as a bear would be to cavemen.

Sekhmet
16-10-2007, 06:36
Ok so ignoring all biased or balance based issues we still have the existence of the Pylon, a fixed Anti Titan/Air platform. Why would Necrons use them if their light attack skimmers could reliably cope with Super Heavy or Titan class opponents?

Logically therefore, they cant.

Shooting down orbiting ships and landing craft long before they hit ground. Light attack skimmers can't reach quite that high, but a Pylon can. Make sense? It's based on a very mobile and agile anti-air platform for a reason.



As for C'tan, im actually of the opinion they are rather well represented in 40k, they are extremely powerful beings, but as much gods as a bear would be to cavemen.
In epic, they're about the same power level as a warhound titan. They shouldn't be in 40k.

empireguard
16-10-2007, 06:58
Electrons from nuclei, you do know the difference right?


Yes I just read your first post wrong



proton + neutron = deuterium, a hydrogen isotope, proton + 2 neutron = tritium, also a hydrogen isotope. If they didn't have 1 electron, they'd be isotopes and ions, however.


Which was my point. They wouldn’t use the word hydrogen Ion to describe protons. yes they have other names but they are still Hydrogen Ions



Neutrons move from about 9900 km/h (0.009C) to 0.07C to create fission. That's pretty fast if you ask me.


Well Neutrons that cause Fission are classes as slow moving, that’s why I mentioned it as those classes as fast moving wouldn’t cause fission.



A Fission reaction in anything smaller than lead is nearly impossible. And turning an entire person into what's basically a fission bomb would be very explosive, something that the fluff does not support at all.

No it just never happens with out the Input of energy and they will not realise any Neutrons if split like U235, Which when in heavy water will slow down and continue the reaction, something that is required to make fission bombs and reactors. I’m also not stating that every atom will undergo fission as this would cause a HUGE explosion like you said, just enough to cause enough energy to melt a hole though someone.

Tehkonrad
16-10-2007, 10:10
Damm Sekhmet and your intelligence... :p

setekhite
16-10-2007, 11:28
As for C'tan, im actually of the opinion they are rather well represented in 40k, they are extremely powerful beings, but as much gods as a bear would be to cavemen.

What defines a 'god'? The C'tan seem to have mythological levels of power, and unlike the warp entity gods of 40K they're not dependent on their worshippers for continued existence.

The C'tan can manipulate reality, devour stars and do lots of 'godlike' stuff. There is a background suggestion that the C'tan are weak from their long dormancy - they may need millenia to reach their full power again. The fact that their battlefield incarnations don't have godlike abilities does not mean they don't exist, any more than the absence of planet-crushing warp entities means the Chaos Gods are limited; if anything, the disparity between the 40K and Epic incarnations suggests that battlefield C'tan are rather like Daemons, they represent a fragment of the true entity's power channeled for battle.

Noserenda
16-10-2007, 14:36
What defines a 'god'? The C'tan seem to have mythological levels of power, and unlike the warp entity gods of 40K they're not dependent on their worshippers for continued existence.


By definition the Ctan cant be gods, they have absolutely no spiritual element whatsoever. You might as well worship a black hole, thats pretty powerful i hear, and grants all sorts of powerfdul gifts on its followers, like spagettification and such...

A God is something not physically real which requires worship and grants protection/gifts upon its followers in some way. A definition that the Chaos gods, "The Emperor", the Eldar pantheon etc etc all meet. Ctan are just big gribbly aliens who the Necrotyr gave sentience to.




The C'tan can manipulate reality, devour stars and do lots of 'godlike' stuff.

So could the Eldar at their height... Were they gods?



if anything, the disparity between the 40K and Epic incarnations suggests that battlefield C'tan are rather like Daemons, they represent a fragment of the true entity's power channeled for battle.

If anything it represents the fact that necrons needed them to be bigegr for reasons of game balance...

setekhite
16-10-2007, 15:19
By definition the Ctan cant be gods, they have absolutely no spiritual element whatsoever. "

Well, that's a possible 40K definition based on how warp entities draw power from mortal worshippers. However, the OED definition of a 'god' is "a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature and human fortunes" - one which certainly fits the C'tan.


Ctan are just big gribbly aliens who the Necrotyr gave sentience to.

And the Chaos Gods are extradimensional entities which developed sentience because of the psychic 'ripples' of mortal creatures. If you choose to define a god as a being which is worshipped, then the C'tan certainly have that - there is even a case that their powers were enhanced by the sacrifices of their mortal followers.


So could the Eldar at their height... Were they gods?


God-like, certainly; I'm not sure if they were ever interested in being worshipped. I'd say they weren't gods in that they were mortal and depended on tools/technology where the C'tan have inherent powers. That said, the aggregate effect of their powers was of course the Eldar gods who are, well, gods.:)

Sekhmet
16-10-2007, 15:20
By definition the Ctan cant be gods, they have absolutely no spiritual element whatsoever. You might as well worship a black hole, thats pretty powerful i hear, and grants all sorts of powerfdul gifts on its followers, like spagettification and such...


This is going a bit off topic, but from the American Heritage Dictionary:
god -
"2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol."

It really depends on your definition of a "god". The most outlandish definition of god has to do with supernatural abilities, but they never mention the spiritual realm. C'tan do indeed have supernatural abilities - they can warp reality. I'd say that's not too natural.



So could the Eldar at their height... Were they gods?

I refer you to the David Blaine episode of South Park. Season 5, episode 4.



if anything, the disparity between the 40K and Epic incarnations suggests that battlefield C'tan are rather like Daemons, they represent a fragment of the true entity's power channeled for battle.

A lot of people use the explanation that C'tan in 40k are like avatars or a demon of a C'tan, not the actual god itself. While it would almost make sense, there's no proof for that.


Empireguard - Your science is pretty good and your theories on how gauss weapons could possibly work might be scientifically sound (as much as sci-fi will allow it to be), but the main thing is that it's not supported by the fluff! Gauss weapons don't melt a hole in people, they don't cause them to explode, they literally disintegrate them layers at a time and pull that material back towards the weapon.

azimaith
16-10-2007, 22:13
The problem with the Eldar C'tan comparison for deityhood is that a god does things through *innate power* not through technology. Second, theres the measure of *scale*. An eldar may be able to cause a psychic storm in a localized space. Powerful yes. A C'tan put the fear of death into every species save for a few. Both are innate power, one might cover a several hundred meters or even a kilometer, the other encompasses *the *******' galaxy*. I think it makes it obvious whose more powerful innately.

The C'tan are gods by common definition and only excluded by people who add in arbitrary criteria on what a god needs.

As for gauss weapons there really won't be a way to figure out how they work essentially until you really get a list of definitive damages to a human target. Are they simply flayed? Are they irradiated and flayed? Are they burned, emitting radiation, and flayed? Do they produce excess quantities of heat (beyond normal immune response), are their electromagnetic readings off kilter, ect ect.

From whats been put forth so far is that targets hit by a gauss flayer would be burned, flayed, and damaged by ionizing radiation.(Alpha particles especially) as well as possibly electrocuted.

empireguard
16-10-2007, 23:30
Empireguard - Your science is pretty good and your theories on how gauss weapons could possibly work might be scientifically sound (as much as sci-fi will allow it to be), but the main thing is that it's not supported by the fluff! Gauss weapons don't melt a hole in people, they don't cause them to explode, they literally disintegrate them layers at a time and pull that material back towards the weapon.

Thanks. I really only though of that on the spot and I don't know that much about Gauss fluff so I'm not surprised if its not supported well by the fluff. I do like your theory, I just think it needs more work and there’s nothing better than throwing ideas around to do that.

For my theory to work with whole bodies disintegrating thing, the weapon would have to fire a wide beam to hit the whole body and as such would work more like a flamer than a gauss gun.

azimaith
16-10-2007, 23:33
Did you see my diagram about a page back? Just because we can't see it doesn't mean its not there, its just not emitting enough light. If you were to turn on a flash light in a dark room the light would expand outward and get fainter toward the edges apparently dissapearing. This doesn't mean theres no photons wizzing through that dark spot, it just means we don't see them at such a low energy.

empireguard
16-10-2007, 23:41
Did you see my diagram about a page back? Just because we can't see it doesn't mean its not there, its just not emitting light. If you were to turn on a flash light in a dark room the light would expand outward and get fainter toward the edges apparently dissapearing. This doesn't mean theres no photons wizzing through that dark spot, it just means we don't see them at such a low energy.

I know but them the weapon would be hit more targets at long range and do less damage. So it would need a rule like 0-12" 1 hit S5 AP4 12-24" 2 hit S4 AP5. Being as the weapon is rapid a rapid fire weapon it hits more models at close range so It wouldn't work in that respect.

azimaith
16-10-2007, 23:46
Yes, but they would be hit with alot less power(Negating the more targets). A target near him losing a cell or some hair isn't going to be quantified in the dark ages of 40k.

Take X-ray as an example. I could shoot an X-Rays at you from 40" which would result in (depending on mAs and kV) a certain amount of exposure. If I shot the same beam at you from 400" you'd recieve damn near nothing (depending on mAs and kV) because the photons are getting so spread apart that even the hard Central Ray isn't carrying much power anymore. After all, part of our safety training is to use time, shielding and *distance* to minimize exposure. In the same way a gauss flayer would represent less power at a distance and the scatter energy off the central ray would be much less damaging, possibily to the point of being non-damaging barring long exposure times. (Exactly like X-ray again).

The farther away you are the less damage you take (you get one shot) which easily represents you getting less exposure. If your closer you get more complete exposure (2 shots) which results in more damage.

You need to remember necrons don't necessarily shoot two shots out. Its ridiculous to claim a person can only pull a trigger faster when the enemies closer to them. Rapid fire represents more shots in the realm of hitting the target. For a necron it can represent them sweeping the beam a short distance nailing more people, or holding the trigger down longer because they are easily close enough to aim at better.

Furthermore those are game stats. An assault cannon doesn't actually fire "4" shots. That would be ridiculous. There all gross abstractions.

Noserenda
17-10-2007, 00:23
Ah but Ctan are also working through tools, the bodies the Necrontyr built for them, without them theyre just undirected blobs slowly floating around the galaxy eating a star every millenia or so.

I still maintain that whatever some American dictionary states about Gods, any being which neither needs or benefits from worship etc is by definition just a powerful alien, and not a "God", anymore than some colony on insects in my garden might worship the "destoyer who come with water" when i get annoyed by their presence.

And on a side note, the Oxford Dictionary site defines a god as:

God

• noun 1 (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and supreme ruler of the universe. 2 (god) a superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature and human fortunes. 3 (god) a greatly admired or influential person. 4 (the gods) informal the gallery in a theatre.

I Bolded the relevant section, but note the Ctan dont fit under this definition of divinity for example.

azimaith
17-10-2007, 00:28
No the C'tan are not working through their necrodermis or technology embedded within it. They can do what they do in them outside of them as well. The necrodermis simply makes them *hungry* in the simplest terms. They don't derive any of their power from being in the necrodermis. They certainly don't become non-sentient for not having the necrodermis. They granted the knowledge of internialess drives to the necrontyr despite spending millions of years without a necrodermis. Their intellects span the gulfs between worlds, they didn't need to necrodermis to become sentient.

For one, we can extend(in 40k) human fortunes to the fortunes of sentient beings.
The C'tan were worshipped by the necrontyr and are worshipped later by a variety of races. They can certainly control your fortunes by either killing you, or granting you gifts. They changed the fortune of the entire necrontyr race. Thus they *do* fall under that definition of divinity. Hell, it were only humans you couldn't count eldar gods. And finally of course, they have control over nature.

C'tan are gods by that definition.

Kymar
17-10-2007, 05:11
This is a pretty interesting thread, and I like Sekhmet's take on the Gauss Flayers, but there is something that has been bothering me since reading the original post.

If the Gauss Flayer disassembles material at the sub-atomic layer, couldn't it very well be effecting Quantum particles (like Quarks and Leptons) or even possibly something deeper like String Theory?

With the Necron having advanced Super-Science that defies common logic, wouldn't it make sense that they would attack the very fabric of reality in the most direct method possible?

*Back to my armchair I go!*

setekhite
17-10-2007, 11:33
I Bolded the relevant section, but note the Ctan dont fit under this definition of divinity for example.

Thanks, it's good to know that the online version agrees with my humble paper one posted earlier in this thread.

The crux of that definition is "worshipped". Nothing about the god benefitting from being worshipped... because most real-world religions don't link their deity's powers to how many worshippers they have. As Azimaith has already noted, C'tan were/are worshipped - by Necrontyr, Silvae and Humans - on account of their enormous powers over natural law. So by the dictionary definition you use, they are gods.

Anyway, to expand your points, the C'tan aren't used by the Necrons; while the Necrontyr awakened the C'tan, the star-gods rapidly took control of Necrontyr society. Now, it is the Necrons that are used by the C'tan, whether it's harvesting life-essence to sate their appetites or building the tools of their Great Work. In that sense the C'tan do benefit from having worshippers, even if they don't need them to survive in the way that warp deities do.

Stella Cadente
17-10-2007, 13:29
how did this go from Necron "gauss" (gauss my butt) weapons to C'tan

Cheesolith
17-10-2007, 15:08
Necron Gauss weapons seem to treat living things different then inorganic objects. In case of dead objects, it punches a hole about the size of the beam but organic tissue is ripped appart from the surface, even if said part of the surface was on the other side of the object.

I don't have my codex with me right now so this might not be 100% accurate.

Somewher in a novel there's are refference about an ultramarine who got shot by an immortal. The beam left a 2'' hole in both the front and the back of the power armor but it's owner was turned to dust completely.

Also, in Caves of Ice, Ciaphas and his friends find a complete set of admech implants, supposedly left untouched after the owner got flayed.

In a short story i have no idea where i read it there was a knarloc who took several glancing hits from a flayer. After a while it dropped dead from bloodloss, it's entire skin gone missing.

Apparently their technology is sufficient to make a supercharged beam of particles sentient so it can choose how to destroy it's target.

The destroyer as titan killer seems faily accurate as they are the only necrons that can aim for the upper areas of the titan like the control area, while footsloggers have to suffice with pincushioning the titan's feet.

The Aeonic orb is not a gauss weapon but a controllable solar flare.

One question i never figured out was how Pylons work. They toss globs of energy at the target but it doesn't say how they get the mass back to the guns.

setekhite
17-10-2007, 15:16
One question i never figured out was how Pylons work. They toss globs of energy at the target but it doesn't say how they get the mass back to the guns.

Pylons have changed.

Originally they were heavier versions of the Monolith particle whip, presumably firing wadges of charged particles at their targets; basically the same tech as plasma rifles, I suppose, but much grander in scale. Now they are just very powerful Gauss weapons - exactly the same principle as a warrior's weapon, just much bigger.

The_Outsider
17-10-2007, 15:24
Isn't there a line in the Necron codex (IIRC on the page with the weapon pictures and the smalelr destroyer vs land raider pictures) that says as far as the Ad Mech are concerned Gauss weaponry is an impossibility (or it funadamentally shouldn't work)?

Maybe trying to understand gauss weaponry is taking things a bit too far.

Rirekon
17-10-2007, 15:38
Is it possible that the flaying nature of a Gauss weapon is a side effect? The C'Tan feed on the life essence/energy of living beings (note: NOT their souls), so maybe the Gauss weapons actually leach this out of their targets and the flaying is caused by the target being ripped apart as this energy is sucked out. This would explain why hard targets (non-living) just get holes punched in them (they beam will need a destructive element in order to penetrate armour) and soft targets (living) are effectively vaporised.
This would also support the concept of the Necrons harvesting worlds rather than destroying/invading them.

Sekhmet
17-10-2007, 16:04
The necron codex states that gauss weapons do NOT treat organic and inorganic materials differently, it flays them all the same. That's why I came to the conclusion that in order for a gauss weapon to punch through something (land raider) rather than flay it completely, it must have been intended to attack much more massive targets.

Rirekon
17-10-2007, 16:09
However other fluff seems to change that view;


Somewher in a novel there's are refference about an ultramarine who got shot by an immortal. The beam left a 2'' hole in both the front and the back of the power armor but it's owner was turned to dust completely.

Also, in Caves of Ice, Ciaphas and his friends find a complete set of admech implants, supposedly left untouched after the owner got flayed.

I'm not arguing with your current ideas, they all sound good to me, was just thinking of different avenues which could incorporate all the fluff.

Trinary
17-10-2007, 19:35
As much as I like to theorise about sci-fi/fan one thing has to be kept in mind when making references to names as informative... In the real world we choose names that informative about the nature of the thing named, assuming we understand its nature. In fiction, names are chosen based on their inference to a cultural common understanding. In that sense, guass weapons are named after the guass concepts in physics, and not after "gauss" technology, either real or imaginary. A guass is a measurement for the strength of a field... The idea being that the Necron weapons emmit a field (it could be a narrow field, hence beam imagery) which is responsible for the effect of the weapon.

A possible reason for the apparent difference in effect between the organic and inorganic is as follows... The guass weapon emmits a field which alters the quantumn nature of reality in that field itself. This new space within space (ie. a type of subspace) results in the atomic nature of the target disintegrating... As the field collapses the material is drawn in via the condencing event horizon of the dissintegrated material. There need not be radiation loss (though there could be) nor do you need to compensate for combersom electromagnetic containment (or lack their of). If this emitted field is in someway dependant on a etheric (as in ether, the fictitious fabric of reality, not as in the aether of the warp) resonance with the target, then a non-uniform compound (ie organic tissue) would be less harshlessly and more uniformly affected, seeming to vapourize. An more uniform compound (like ceramic) or elements like adamantium would be affected in a more violent way, causing a "punched" effect.

All of this is sci-fantisy, not fiction... sub-space and etheric concepts are not technologies the Imperium readily employs (assuming it is even aware of them). Being able to travel dimensionally (not through the warp) something commonly done in sci-fi by sub-space or etheric manipulation, in could superceed the physical limitations (ie. power requirements) expected by the Imperium.

Think of it like the Necrons use Star Trek style technology rather then the new age technomancy that GW usually writes about.

destroyerlord
18-10-2007, 11:11
As much as I like to theorise about sci-fi/fan one thing has to be kept in mind when making references to names as informative... In the real world we choose names that informative about the nature of the thing named, assuming we understand its nature. In fiction, names are chosen based on their inference to a cultural common understanding. In that sense, guass weapons are named after the guass concepts in physics, and not after "gauss" technology, either real or imaginary. A guass is a measurement for the strength of a field... The idea being that the Necron weapons emmit a field (it could be a narrow field, hence beam imagery) which is responsible for the effect of the weapon.
Ach, you just beat me to it. People seem to assume 'gauss weapon' has to correspond exactly to a current coilgun or gauss gun(by the way those things are awesome fun. If you are still in high school, do physics. It rocks). It makes more sense to me that the weapon somehow makes use of the gauss principle. That doesn't mean it has to use the gauss principle to fire a projectile. After reading the whole thread it seems to me that the OP has thought through this the most, and his description seems the most likely. Well thought out, well done. :) I think you mentioned stripping off electrons and then the atoms will break down (due to no -ve charge holding the nucleus together). The flayer does this by way of an incredibly powerful magnetic flux arc. Wait, isn't the name of the monoliths' weapon?
So basically, the weapon causes a magnetic field of incredible strength to propagate towards the target. When it hits said target, the magnetic force is so strong it pulls the electrons far enough away from the nucleus that strong nuclear force is no longer enough to hold the nucleus together. Protons go one way, electrons go the other. The atom is broken down and radiation goes everywhere. Note due to the joined nature of magnetic field lines the positive ions or protons and negative electrons will end up joining back together. Or they just ground to the earth. Whatever. I'm too tired for physics...

Gazak Blacktoof
18-10-2007, 11:59
I like Trinary's ideas. There's no reason to believe that we can work out exactly how gauss weapons function, its unlikely to be based on any principle we "fully" understand and can model to date. Particle and quantum physics is a relatively new science and one that GW's staff are unlikely to be knowledgeable in.

Its all just "rule of cool" in the end.

Anybody wanting to understand a bit more about the C'Tan should probably read Arthur C Clark and George Benford's Against the Fall of Night/ Beyond the Fall of Night.