Making a building crumble to dust with my Bond villian Orbiting destructor ray

krd

I had an idea. And I wonder if it's plausible.

Targeting concrete with a beam tuned to a critical bond (chemical bond) absorption frequency, would my concrete block crumble into dust?


Could I scale this up, to a Moonraker style orbiting space station, where I could hold the world to ransom?

Do you think Richard Branson might be interested?

Capt'n Midnight

what's the melting point of silicon dioxide ?

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

what's the melting point of silicon dioxide ?

I'm not looking to melt the cement. I'm looking to directly target some of the chemical bonds, and make the cement lose its' strength so it crumbles.

Cement is given its' strength through hydration. SiO2 + 2H2O = Si(OH)4

I was thinking, what if I specifically targeted the OH bonds.

ted1

The correct resonance frequency will do the job.

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

I'm not looking to melt the cement. I'm looking to directly target some of the chemical bonds, and make the cement lose its' strength so it crumbles.

Cement is given its' strength through hydration. SiO2 + 2H2O = Si(OH)4

I was thinking, what if I specifically targeted the OH bonds.

SiO2 + 2H2O = Si(OH)4

What does that predict for beaches ?

Cement chemistry is far more complex than that.

Even if you did break all the bonds, concrete is a material in compression so the remaining material would retain most of it's strength.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mats05/mats05054.htm

Concrete is a very complicated mixture of different metal oxides, hydroxides, and silicates (many of which form extensive, interpenetrating networks), mixed with a filler material such as gravel or rock. It does not maintain its chemical identity when heated. If concrete is heated to a high enough temperature, the hydroxides decompose to form oxides and water; the water is quickly lost as the vapor. The remaining metal oxides are quite refractory; they remain solid at very high temperatures. The rock components of concrete will decompose or melt at differing temperatures depending on their mineral composition.

So the short answer to your question is that concrete will decompose rather then melt when heated, and the clinker that remains after it cools back down will unmistakably not be concrete.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

SiO2 + 2H2O = Si(OH)4

What does that predict for beaches ?

I assume it's something similar to the fact a diamond will not turn into carbonic acid if you drop it in a glass of water.

Cement chemistry is far more complex than that.

I know it's complex. The Roman's had the original recipe, then it was lost until the 20th century.

Even if you did break all the bonds, concrete is a material in compression so the remaining material would retain most of it's strength.

I don't need to break all the bonds. Just enough to make the structure unstable. Then gravity will do the rest. The other bonds retaining their strength will help make the concrete more brittle.

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

I assume it's something similar to the fact a diamond will not turn into carbonic acid if you drop it in a glass of water.

Nope.
A diamond will burn, CO2 will dissolve in water, it's energetically favourable, just hard to ignite.

I know it's complex. The Roman's had the original recipe, then it was lost until the 20th century.

The chemistry of Portland cement is very different.

I don't need to break all the bonds. Just enough to make the structure unstable. Then gravity will do the rest. The other bonds retaining their strength will help make the concrete more brittle.

That doesn't make sense.
Yes you can get photo sensitive polymers where the cross links between strands are vulnerable. But even then you are talking thin layers. Concrete is not transparent. Even if you could destroy the bonds you aren't going to get penetration , with enough energy to melt the building all you would get is dust on the surface protecting it. cf. Aluminium protected by aluminium oxide.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Nope.
A diamond will burn, CO2 will dissolve in water, it's energetically favourable, just hard to ignite.

Well it's not that favourable for Silicon Dioxide crystals to readily dissolve in water. But, it does happen. Silicic acids are formed, which condense back to silicon dioxide in the form of silica gel. A the beauty of Wikipedia, it can make it look like you know something you really don't.

The chemistry of Portland cement is very different.

So. The idea is much the same. Until cement was rediscovered the binders in mortars were very poor. Sometimes they were not much more than clay and sand, depending on being kept permanently damp to give them strength.

Yes you can get photo sensitive polymers where the cross links between strands are vulnerable. But even then you are talking thin layers.

Any material will have an absorption spectra. And some of the lines will be the bonds.

Concrete is not transparent.

How do radio waves penetrate it?.........

Even if you could destroy the bonds you aren't going to get penetration , with enough energy to melt the building all you would get is dust on the surface protecting it. cf. Aluminium protected by aluminium oxide.

Transparency and penetration isn't that straightforward. A favourable frequency may get a good penetration. And I'm looking to weaken the structure not melt the building. To bring a building down you need nowhere near the energy required to melt the material. The pressure wave from a car bomb is often enough to destroy a building's structural integrity but the energy in the explosives would be nowhere near enough to melt the materials.

If I can get penetration with a ray in and around the bond frequency, then hopefully, it might rattle around long enough, before it disperses to broadband thermal frequencies, to cause some serious damage.

If I did tests on concrete, I might be able to find frequencies that could produce acoustic phonons in the material which could be destabilizing.

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

Well it's not that favourable for Silicon Dioxide crystals to readily dissolve in water. But, it does happen. Silicic acids are formed, which condense back to silicon dioxide in the form of silica gel.

In other words you are claiming that sand is water soluble.

Any material will have an absorption spectra. And some of the lines will be the bonds.

Metals would be an obvious exception.

How do radio waves penetrate it?.........

they don't have enough energy to break bonds. Attenuation through concrete is fairly severe. Work out what it is in wavelengths. Then see how far that number of wavelengths gets you at frequencies corresponding to the energy of the bonds involved.

If I did tests on concrete, I might be able to find frequencies that could produce acoustic phonons in the material which could be destabilizing.

not if it's an inhomogeneous amorphous substance

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

In other words you are claiming that sand is water soluble.

To a certain extent, yes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/WOA05_sea-surf_SIO2_AYool.png

Annual mean sea surface silicic acid for the World Ocean. Data from the World Ocean Atlas 2005

Metals would be an obvious exception.

Metal oxides wouldn't.

they don't have enough energy to break bonds. Attenuation through concrete is fairly severe. Work out what it is in wavelengths. Then see how far that number of wavelengths gets you at frequencies corresponding to the energy of the bonds involved.

I don't know what the attentuation would be. But I was hoping that frequencies would be absorbed and reemitted, since they're on the spectral lines, and the bonds get broken by thermal vibration.

And I haven't work out how much power I'm going to give the thing yet.

not if it's an inhomogeneous amorphous substance

Sound can travel through inhomogenous amorphous substances.

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

But I was hoping that frequencies would be absorbed and reemitted, since they're on the spectral lines, and the bonds get broken by thermal vibration.

And I haven't work out how much power I'm going to give the thing yet.

Sound can travel through inhomogenous amorphous substances.

It's orbiting , sound don't travel through vacuums

absorbed AND reemitted ?

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

absorbed AND reemitted ?

Yes absorbed AND reemitted. Light in the frequency of the spectral line, will be absorbed, make an electron jump an energy level, and be reemitted at the same frequency nearly instantaneously. And this photon will ping pong between accepting bonds, until it's frequency is scattered out of range. And then it becomes a thermal photon - or joins the rest of the phonons (whatever way you want to describe it).


Why?....What did you think happened? You didn't think, like Svante Arrhenius in 1896, and that *cough* certain "scientists" believe, the light in the frequency of the absorption bands is instantly thermalised. That wouldn't make any sense, would it?.....would it?......The thermal effect is in scattering, not in the spectral lines.

*cough* let's not get started on the "the forbidden discussion".

It's orbiting , sound don't travel through vacuums

You're a man of limited imagination, you'll never make into the globally terrorising mad scientist league.

How about we pulse the light, to see if we can get sound phonons going with radiative pressure.

Stop picking holes in my idea and help me build the thing.

"Mr. Putin, transfer one hundred billion dollars into our Geneva bank account by noon, or we will turn red square into a red children's play pit...You and your friends can play sand castles Mr. Putin.....(insert evil manical laugh)....(then silence and seriousness).....I can assure you we are not joking.......In our account by noon.. or else.............Good day Mr. Putin...."

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

Yes absorbed AND reemitted. Light in the frequency of the spectral line, will be absorbed, make an electron jump an energy level, and be reemitted at the same frequency nearly instantaneously.

The energy adsorbed by the electron jump will not be available.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The energy adsorbed by the electron jump will not be available.

And where will this energy go? The electron jump will not make energy vanish into thin air. And the electron will not stay permanently in the higher energy state - if it falls it must release the same quanta of energy that made it jump. The atom will not convert the absorbed energy into momentum (heat).

What happens, the electron jumps to the higher energy state - it is unstable, and then it falls releasing a photon of the same energy as was absorbed.

Now. For some strange reason. People have a misunderstanding of absorption spectra. The atoms do not permanently gobble up the photons. They absorb them, then release them again - however the angle they release them at isn't the same as the incident angle. So, you might get the impression the atoms had gobble up the photons permanently - they haven't.

Since the atoms release the photons at the same frequency as they absorbed them, there is no momentum given to the atoms (no heating).

The absorption that causes heating, is Compton scattering. Incident photons hit the atoms, this give the atoms a little momentum, and the photon loses some of its' frequency. This goes on until the photons are dispersed across a broad band of frequencies, and the atoms have taken the energy in heat.

Now, absorption spectra were known about in the 19th century. But they're not really properly understood until Niels Bohr, in the 20th century. Compton was also 20th century, as was Einstein and Planck. Arrhenius, was 19th century, a man of the steam age. Arrhenius is often cited in a certain field of "science".



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Stimulated_Emission.svg/550px-Stimulated_Emission.svg.png

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

And where will this energy go?

If/when a photon is released it will contain the difference in energy between the original photon and the electrons gain.

If you put a black tile in sunlight , it will get hot - the photons it re-radiates will have much lower energy than the incident ones, and it will continue to radiate warmth/photons for some time.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If/when a photon is released it will contain the difference in energy between the original photon and the electrons gain.

No. You're wrong. For a quantum jump, an electron from one energy level to the next, only a very precise quantity of energy is allowed. The electron has to lose precisely the same quantity of energy as it falls back to a lower energy level. No momentum, or energy gain. A photon of precisely the same energy is released.

If you put a black tile in sunlight , it will get hot - the photons it re-radiates will have much lower energy than the incident ones, and it will continue to radiate warmth/photons for some time.

That's scattering. Which is completely different to the process by which absorption and emission spectra happen. Photons outside the frequency of the absorption spectra, can collide with atoms as if they are particles.

Your black tiles. The photons re-radiate at a much lower frequency/energy, because they have lost energy/or momentum in this case, to the molecules in the tiles.

I may be an idiot...but you are not going to win this one with me. I am absolutely correct. Lasers would be impossible, if I weren't. In fact reality as we know it wouldn't be possible either. The sky wouldn't even be blue.

Can we get back to building the death ray?

krd

Why hasn't the Capt'n come back to kick my ass?

Capt'n Midnight

Just waiting for the orbital mirror to get into position:pac:


Then again rods from God really have that whole crumbling concrete thing going for them.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just waiting for the orbital mirror to get into position:pac:


Then again rods from God really have that whole crumbling concrete thing going for them.

Yeah, I've been thinking about the orbital mirror. Super thin foil with some kind of rods to manipulate it.

Though from my calculations, for the thing to be of any use, it would need to be absolutely collosal. Using sunlight on the moon as a reference (which I can't find a figure I think is accurate - I'll go with Wikipedia 120 W) You'd need a kilometre to get 120 MW. Which isn't very much. Especially when you consider that it has to pass through the atmosphere.

I remember there was talk of these years ago - that you could use a mirror to keep a city warm in winter. Though that might not really happen, and what you'd have instead would be a really big draft.

My head is wrecked thinking about this stuff - I had nightmare last night - I was trying to imagine the thermodynamic flows in weather and wind, like ping pong balls - trying to imagine their flow through hot they interact with each other. I woke screaming at 4 in the morning "NOOOO!!!", face covered in sticky cold sweat.

Are there any optical materials - glasses - where there is a difference in the refractive index depending on the direction of the light. I had an idea of some kind of pseudo laser - where I could trap light in a reflective cavity, and get a similar effect to a laser.

Capt'n Midnight

spin the mirror to get it in shape

1KW/m2 so lots of power



Lasers only work if you can pump electrons into stable high energy levels.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

spin the mirror to get it in shape .

Spin and bend......Though I was thinking, if the mirrors were in something like sqaures, they could just be tilted to focus. And I was also worrying about radiative pressure (how much light isn't reflected, and how much power would be need to keep the mirrors in place, and not turn the thing into a fantastic solar sail).

1KW/m2 so lots of power

That sounds like a lot - what's your source?

Lasers only work if you can pump electrons into stable high energy levels

Yeah, what I was thinking about was a pseudo laser, not a real laser at all. More bouncing around the light inside a reflective cavity, and have it all exit in a high power beam through an escape slot - which is kind of what is done with lasers.

I have thought about real lasers - but I'm trying to do this on a budget.


But the lasing idea is interesting - if you could focus the mirrors, and then trap the light in a cavity - could you bonce it all into the lasing frequencies of a medium?............Is there some kind of lasing combination - (mirrors, device layers, etc) that hasn't been thought of?......We haven't even dragged Klystrons and Magnetrons into this yet.

And materials......You don't have to worry much when you have a 10 kilometre square array of foil mirrors - but anything you focus that power down onto will have major problems dealing with it. ...and you don't need to think of materials that exist..more materials that would need to exist to make this work - some kind of super crystal - even some kind of liquid crystal.

Oregano_State

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

not if it's an inhomogeneous amorphous substance

This x 100000

Concrete is not homogenous and made up of lots of different compounds in varying quantities. An EM beam of a particular wavelength would not have a great effect due to this.

Penetration would be poor, and you'd get other compounds other than the one you were targeting adsorbing your precious energy, due to the adsorption spectrum being so broad, complex and not homogenous.

A high energy sound cannon, tuned to the resonant frequency of the building would probably work better. But that's heading towards an earthquake machine.

And nobody wants one of those to be invented.

Oregano_State

krd wrote: »

No. You're wrong. For a quantum jump, an electron from one energy level to the next, only a very precise quantity of energy is allowed. The electron has to lose precisely the same quantity of energy as it falls back to a lower energy level. No momentum, or energy gain. A photon of precisely the same energy is released.



That's scattering. Which is completely different to the process by which absorption and emission spectra happen. Photons outside the frequency of the absorption spectra, can collide with atoms as if they are particles.

Your black tiles. The photons re-radiate at a much lower frequency/energy, because they have lost energy/or momentum in this case, to the molecules in the tiles.

I may be an idiot...but you are not going to win this one with me. I am absolutely correct. Lasers would be impossible, if I weren't. In fact reality as we know it wouldn't be possible either. The sky wouldn't even be blue.

Can we get back to building the death ray?

There are non-radiative processes that occur, which changes the electron's energy, and can affect subsequent emissions. This is what causes the difference betwween phosphorescenec and flourescence.

These effects become much more pronounced with more complicated materials and delocalised electrons.

krd

Oregano_State wrote: »

There are non-radiative processes that occur, which changes the electron's energy, and can affect subsequent emissions. This is what causes the difference betwween phosphorescenec and flourescence.

No, they're still radiative processes. You may get an emissions of more than one photon, at different frequencies - but energy must be conserved, and the electron has to fall to a lower energy level. You don't get any momentum, so you get no heat in the process.

I probably wasn't clear. What I meant was the energy of the photon in is precisely the same as the photon/s out.

These effects become much more pronounced with more complicated materials and delocalised electrons.

There's more than one way of creating light. The black body spectrum is closely related to heat - because it's light is created through collisions and scattering. The line spectra is limited to lines (obviously) because there's a limited number of energy states the electron can be in, in an element,or even a compound.

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

No, they're still radiative processes. You may get an emissions of more than one photon, at different frequencies - but energy must be conserved, and the electron has to fall to a lower energy level. You don't get any momentum, so you get no heat in the process.

The electron doesn't have to fall any time soon.

Just exactly how do you think heat is stored ?

Capt'n Midnight

Oregano_State wrote: »

A high energy sound cannon, tuned to the resonant frequency of the building would probably work better. But that's heading towards an earthquake machine.

And nobody wants one of those to be invented.

There is the slight problem of how to make an orbiting sound canon what with there being a noticeable lack of a transmission medium.

Yeah you could send pulses of energy and try to superheat air like a electrostatic / flame speaker.

Or use microwaves to create an artificial aurora like HAARP

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The electron doesn't have to fall any time soon.

What's the probability it stays up there for days?

I believe, most of the time, it has to fall very very quickly. Otherwise the atom's chemical properties wouldn't be as stable as they are.

But one of the interesting things, is you don't get atomic momentum when you zap an atom on one of its' spectral lines.

I'm not sure if the spectral lines of bonds in molecules show the bonding energy. They probably do. Even there, there is not atomic momentum.

I'd really love to play with laser cooling.. Your laser is tuned just below the frequency of a spectral line. And if an atoms velocity is just right, it Doppler shifts the incoming photon, then releases it at its' line frequency, and the atom loses momentum. And it's interesting that when that photon is released it will have thermally neutral effect on any atom that absorbs it. And if it's slightly down shifted in a scattering collision. It will be able to grab back the lost heat by slowing down another atom.

You could also separate isotopes with lasers - reverse the method on one laser to heat one isotope, and then cool the other with a different laser. Maybe you have to do it in a very tall column, but I think it might work very well. Wouldn't it be amazing if it worked so well, you got one isotope to liquefy. Get rid of your auld centrifuges and build a bomb in weeks.

Just exactly how do you think heat is stored ?

Sometimes in the chemical bonds.....But you could also say in the momentum of the atoms/molecules.

I think the reason the absorption bands appear is because of the angular momentum of gas atoms - the release time is just long enough, that atom is facing a different direction once the photon emerges.

locum-motion

krd wrote: »

... - but I'm trying to do this on a budget...

I have to ask: How much is your budget?

locum-motion

Oregano_State wrote: »

...And nobody wants one of those to be invented.

Oh, I think Dr. KRD Evil wants one!

Oregano_State

krd wrote: »

No, they're still radiative processes. You may get an emissions of more than one photon, at different frequencies - but energy must be conserved, and the electron has to fall to a lower energy level. You don't get any momentum, so you get no heat in the process.

Have a look at a Jablonski diagram and get back to me.

krd wrote: »

I probably wasn't clear. What I meant was the energy of the photon in is precisely the same as the photon/s out.

In Flourescence, non radiative processes lower the energy of excited electrons so the emitted photons can be of a lower energy. The degree to which this process occurs is expressed by the quantum yield.

krd wrote: »

There's more than one way of creating light. The black body spectrum is closely related to heat - because it's light is created through collisions and scattering. The line spectra is limited to lines (obviously) because there's a limited number of energy states the electron can be in, in an element,or even a compound.

Yes.

Oregano_State

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

There is the slight problem of how to make an orbiting sound canon what with there being a noticeable lack of a transmission medium.

Yeah you could send pulses of energy and try to superheat air like a electrostatic / flame speaker.

Or use microwaves to create an artificial aurora like HAARP

I forgot that this had to be an orbiting device. Makes it more mobile and fear-inducing I suppose, but is a very expensive requirement. Seeing as we are on a budget and all.

krd

Oregano_State wrote: »

Have a look at a Jablonski diagram and get back to me.

Why don't you get back to me - I don't see where you're getting molecular momentum in there.

And you can post diagrams here.

In Flourescence, non radiative processes lower the energy of excited electrons so the emitted photons can be of a lower energy. The degree to which this process occurs is expressed by the quantum yield.

Yes, I know the term is "non radiative", but the molecule will radiate.

krd

Oregano_State wrote: »

I forgot that this had to be an orbiting device. Makes it more mobile and fear-inducing I suppose, but is a very expensive requirement. Seeing as we are on a budget and all.

The plan is to trick Richard Branson into funding the thing - like it's some kind of orbiting eco hotel for rich people.

And once it's ready, our first test firing will be Richard on his private Island.

"Yes, Mr. Branson....the orbiting hotel is nearly fully operational......our technicians are just putting the final touches to it right now.......Oh, and Mr. Branson, I hear you're going to have some very hot weather on the island today.......please be careful and don't forget to wear your sunblock - Good day Mr. Branson".


-* video link ends * -

-* Ominous music slowly swells *-

"Gunter, I think it's time we lost our virginity....Show Richard the hot bargain he's bought his way into. "

Capt'n Midnight

krd wrote: »

And once it's ready, our first test firing will be Richard on his private Island

I can see it now , massive special effects, flames, a house on fire , a figure appears through the smoke, it's Kate Winslet and she's carrying Branson's 90 year old mother ...


'cept this actually happened last August
and he's probably upgraded the defences since.


Things that have made buildings crumble to dust include earthquake bombs. (just a drop a very big bomb from very high up so it penetrates deep into the earth before it goes off)

You could also use sound energy but not easy from orbit.


The original idea of getting bonds to break doesn't really work. Many plastics used out doors are black because carbon is added to protect the bonds from UV damage. Also you are restricted to using radiation that isn't adsorbed by the atmosphere. The atmosphere looks transparent but in reality can be thought of as being 10m of water but with different absorption spectrum (more than 10m if you aren't directly overhead). During WWII the USAF had terrible problems with one model of radar that worked fine on the test ground back home, it was unusable in the Pacific because it was using a wavelength attenuated by water vapour.

krd

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The original idea of getting bonds to break doesn't really work. Many plastics used out doors are black because carbon is added to protect the bonds from UV damage.

I was thinking that there might be, with a bit of luck, even a single bond that might be susceptible. If that were so, getting a bond to vibrate might be enough to weaken the material.

Also you are restricted to using radiation that isn't adsorbed by the atmosphere. The atmosphere looks transparent but in reality can be thought of as being 10m of water but with different absorption spectrum (more than 10m if you aren't directly overhead).

Yes, I had thought of that - but not got around to thinking of the engineering implications. Though it made me wonder, would it be possible to create tornado like vortices. I was also thinking, as you heat the vapours in the air - you might get a mushroom cloud effect - I'm not sure if the beam were hot enough, it might push everything out of its way.

I had been thinking about the problem though - this is why the original collector mirror would have to be huge - well over ten kilometres........the simple way to get around the problem is make the mirror bigger.

During WWII the USAF had terrible problems with one model of radar that worked fine on the test ground back home, it was unusable in the Pacific because it was using a wavelength attenuated by water vapour.

You'd think they'd work that one out on paper, before they set sail. A radar that only works when it's not raining, and there's little humidity, and you're in a desert on a hot day, isn't going to be much use on a ship.

In WWII, one reason Operation Market Garden failed, was the radios they were using worked fine in England, but not in Holland. I think it was because fog near the ground was absorbing all the radio signal - and they weren't getting the bounce off the ionosphere.


But these engineering problems have given me a new idea. X-rays. They should penetrate 10 metres of water without losing much energy, but when they hit the ground, they'll be absorbed within a few metres at the most. It could cause mini earthquakes - the thermal expansion may be more than enough to bring a building down - metal supports would melt - and anyone caught in the ray would cook from their teeth and bones out.