5
$\begingroup$

In this question we came up with a weapon that would be quite powerful if it could have variable weight and inertia. In the comments of the accepted answer a user pointed out that we basically invented Mjolnir, Thor's hammer. And I agreed, it basically can do anything Mjolnir can except conjure lightning, you could even fly with it if you were brave stupid enough to actually throw the hammer while it is attached to you.

So in a Melee weapon that you can control the inertia and weight of, what type of material should it be made out of so it resists the potential huge impacts with other objects so it breaks the thing it is impacting without breaking itself? I feel like most common metals e.g. Iron, steal, aluminium, etc would be too weak.

The main concern would be a Hammer that is solid all the way through, though bonus points if you can have something fragile inside like electronics.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I can't help but think of X-men, and ponder if you've simply built a weapon by putting Juggernaut at the end of a stick. $\endgroup$ – Cort Ammon Oct 29 '15 at 22:58
  • $\begingroup$ LOL, reminds me of the franklinator from Futurama but on a much larger scale. $\endgroup$ – TaylorAllred Oct 29 '15 at 23:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well I'll be darned, I inspired a question. +1 $\endgroup$ – Sean Boddy Oct 30 '15 at 1:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ My friends and I have a non-cannon theory about Mjolnir. It's not heavy. It's stubborn. It doesn't dig a huge hole in the ground when you drop it, but it doesn't move after that. I think it actually makes more sense than the canon rationale: Thor can't wield it because he's some superhero... Thor can wield it because he's the only person in the universe that's more stubborn than Mjolnir is! $\endgroup$ – Cort Ammon Oct 30 '15 at 7:48
5
$\begingroup$

Neutronium. Pure degenerate matter that is neutrons almost all the way through, plus whatever controls the apparent mass. Given the incredible density of this stuff, bang it against a merely solid object and it'll smash through it almost as easily as it would pass through a gas.

It'll be approaching the strength of an atomic nucleus too, not weak like stuff that's mostly empty space filled with a relative handful of electrons. Nothing other than more neutronium could be expected to have any significant effect on it.

You could have this weapon effectively empty space enclosed by a hair's thickness of neutronium 'foil' (as long as you can keep it stable using your 'electronics'), say 1 cubic millimetre of neutronium in total, and it'd still weigh 400,000 metric tons if you weren't controlling the mass.

Put this Mjollnir down and turn off the mass controller, and from a standing start, it'd punch a hole all the way down to the centre of the earth from sheer ground pressure, and it'd oscillate around for some time, ripping up the earth's core until it eventually settled at earth's centre of mass.

Throw this with its mass turned down to zero, then, while still attached to it, restore its mass, and you'd be dragged about as far as you could throw anything, but no further - gravity provides a constant acceleration regardless of the mass of the lesser of the two masses, so it'd fall to earth just as soon as anything else you threw. Of course, with negative mass, you could make a diametrical drive

If you have a device that can control the effective mass of an object, you can then build a diametrical drive and an alcubierre warp drive ship, and given those, getting to a neutron star and ripping off a tiny fragment of neutronium wouldn't pose too much of a problem.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well crap. "Mjolnir was forged in the heart of a dying star" is the description of if in the comics I think, that would be a Neutron star most likely, which would have Neutronium. Lol, nice work $\endgroup$ – TaylorAllred Oct 29 '15 at 23:19
  • $\begingroup$ Welp. Beat me to the punch. I was going to say whatever the heck they make those Keyblades out of, but those do still have some weight to them. $\endgroup$ – Nefer007 Oct 29 '15 at 23:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ To be fair, when I made that comment, I really did mean variable inertia, as in the ability to arbitrarily designate the vector magnitude of the object. Which really would let you actually fly, even if it was while awkwardly holding onto a levitating doomsday device and flapping in the wind. $\endgroup$ – Sean Boddy Oct 30 '15 at 1:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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