The Mute Charge: a expendable device used to make its surroundings nearly silent. I discovered the device while playing Cod: AW, and looking back on it now it would seem impossible to construct with modern physics and tech.


If these nifty devices were somehow given to us via plot device (aliens, ancient technology rediscovered, etc) What would it provide in terms of military ability?


  • 20m radius of effectiveness
  • The Charge essentially has the property to stop sound for around 10 seconds: any noise made in the radius it creates would be muffled, similar to a silencer except with area effect
  • After 10 seconds, the charge would be expended, and all noise would resume to normal.
  • The charge only stops Sound by pausing/slowing air particles: it does not affect motion of people, bullets, or projectiles
  • The charge cannot be recycled or recharged: it would be useless after use
  • being a new technology, these charges would be relatively expensive compared to other breaching charges.

No Hard Science is requested: just how these devices would effect current military operations if integrated.

  • $\begingroup$ Can we continuously deploy charges one after another that silence never stops? $\endgroup$
    – Alexander
    Commented Dec 8, 2017 at 23:27
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Hint: if the device works by "pausing/slowing air particles", then being inside such a field may cause suffocation, as well as put out fires, and create insane air friction for anything moving within it. Bullets would travel slower, as would people. Furthermore, when you say that it muffles sounds, "similar to a silencer" .. I have bad news. Silencers are not that silent. So please redefine your parameters a little better. $\endgroup$
    – AndreiROM
    Commented Dec 9, 2017 at 0:40
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Please don't use reality-check on this question, as it makes it impossible to answer; you mentioned that it's impossible in the first line of your question. Try science based instead if you want speculation $\endgroup$
    – nzaman
    Commented Dec 9, 2017 at 5:17
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ So I don't know what this device would do. But I can guarantee that someone is going to strap it to a supersonic aircraft and see what the effect is! The things this device would need to do to silence sound could have enormous aerodynamic properties once you start dealing with the boundary layers of supersonic aircraft! $\endgroup$
    – Cort Ammon
    Commented Dec 9, 2017 at 23:02

2 Answers 2


Use by special ops teams comes to mind. A sniper moves closer than ever to his target, he releases the canister next to himself and fires. A truck containing combatants uses several as it pulls in next to a town full of insurgents. It is discharged simultaneously with an actual bomb on an airstrip or next to a landed aircraft. A submarine releases a couple behind it while changing directions to evade the sonar of another sub. (Does it slow water vibrations?)

Mafia hit men might use it the same way.

If the period of effectiveness were longer, it might help disrupt enemy communications. Consider hundreds dropped from an aircraft during a battle. Planning for this tactic, your troops have visual methods of communicating, while the enemy tries to use their radios with no effect. As your parameters are, though, I think this would be to expensive/short to work, though.

Any force that is not being covert anyways, or will be engaged for very long won't find this useful, I suspect.

In general, it allows the spec ops team to get closer and do more while giving the enemy less information/warning about their position.

  • $\begingroup$ Most of the noise that a submarine would give away are internal noises - Where everything's kept to where the crew can survive. You can do quite a lot by suppressing that noise, which these devices would work splendidly at even if they don't mess with water. $\endgroup$
    – Andon
    Commented Dec 10, 2017 at 6:44
  • $\begingroup$ Good call on the communication blackout. The military already uses some silent communication methods, such as hand signals. Combat troops could potentially use throat mics and bone conductors to send and receive verbal comms without relying on air transmission of sound. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2017 at 15:30

A cloud of nano-bots with (already invented) sound cancelation. They would interact with eachother using magnets. So they would detect the sound and move together to create the same sound but one wavelength earlier. It would require lots of energy. The deployment case would have to contain some sort of generator, there would also need to be one on every nano-bot.(this is what i said earier just with more waffle)

  • $\begingroup$ Welcome to WorldBuilding Georgios! Could you expand your answer a bit by editing it? We prefer longer elaborate answers that explain everything that is necessary for the OP in his specific situation and not just send them on another search through Wikipedia and forums with a few new keywords. One-line answers are often deleted. This answer is currently in the low-quality review queue because of its length and might therefore be deleted if you don't edit it. If you have a moment please take the tour and visit the help center to learn more about the site. Have fun! $\endgroup$
    – Secespitus
    Commented Dec 9, 2017 at 23:01
  • $\begingroup$ If you don't like it, delet it. I gave an answer because no-one else was willing after one day, Nt my fault if you don't like it. $\endgroup$
    – Georgios
    Commented Dec 11, 2017 at 4:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Georgios: Hi, It is not anyone's intent to cause offence. it's about following the site guidelines and providing good answers according to those guidelines. In this specific question, the asker wants to know to what effect this tech would have on military engagements, not a theoretical implementation of the tech. Right now they're not interested in its development or its mechanics, but they want to know how it would be used. Unfortunately your answer is on the development of the tech. It's a good answer, however it is not an answer for the question that was asked. Thanks. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2017 at 16:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .