My idea us that through what can be defined as reverse tron lasers we have infinite neutronium and through an equilibrium of quantum levitation, a single massively dense object can offset its potential energy via kinetic force once a switch diverts that equilibrium, and the excess energy is stored in a battery while the next slug loads.

Is there a way I can improve this description using actual science?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Does the neutronium interact with the quantum entangled photons directed at the reverse lasers? Otherwise I can not see how an equilibrium can be established without compromising the massively dense object and prematurely setting off the transition to kinetic force before the switch is toggled. $\endgroup$ – Justin Thyme Mar 21 '19 at 1:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The word infinite there is troublesome. At the very least you are.creating black holes, and not the miniature variety theorized to be produced by things like the LHC. $\endgroup$ – Renan Mar 21 '19 at 1:54
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The only way to pull off that kind of fiction is to get a degree in physics. The alternative is to simply not care. Maybe you can see like that: I want to fix my car by using a michaels-extender and connect the exhaust wiper with the diesel battery. See, I've used a bunch of car sounding words and arranged them in a nice sounding way. The only way to write about actually fixing a car would be learning how to do it. Stick with what you know. If you can't speak French, don't have your main character speak French. You can say he is French, but details are what kill you $\endgroup$ – Raditz_35 Mar 21 '19 at 2:27
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Ps: because someone might comment on that: you can perhaps pull off the French thing here and there as you can pull off the lack of physics or car knowledge to a degree. But really making sense of this random sentence will lead to only one thing: it being applied to a situation where it stops working or doesn't fit somewhere in the story. Perhaps ask yourself what you truly need to know in order to build your world and if that is really the question to ask $\endgroup$ – Raditz_35 Mar 21 '19 at 2:38
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ As far as I'm concerned, this is just technobabble. A fair bit more believable than "parabolic calculus" since it relies on words that a AP physics student wouldn't understand, but pretty much just meaningless jargon. $\endgroup$ – Beefster Mar 21 '19 at 4:26


I am not sure if I understand what you are thinking but it is too complex for me to get on a discussion forum. Your readers will not get it in a novel. Using actual science will not help. In fact, unless your target audience is composed of physics students it will make it worse.

Anyway, since you already pull neutronium out of thin air, just do so. Inside the gun, in the shape of a dart, and with healthy dose of kinetic energy in the correct direction. Why have two pieces of super science to explain when the one is enough?

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.