What is the difference between a phaser and a laser?
A phaser starts with a "ph." Sorry. This seemed like such an easy question, but it leads to gluons, quarks, and the differences between fundamental forces. So I've broken this article into two sections: simple answer and complete answer.
Simple Answer: They shoot out different stuff
Lasers emit photons, or light. These can be so weak that they don't do anything but annoy you, like those little laser pointer keychains, or they can be so strong that they boil you away to vapors.
Ever gotten sunburn? You get more powerful lasers by building a bigger one, or one with a bigger power source, or both. A laser gun's strength cannot be changed once the gun has been built.
Phasers don't emit light. Instead, they emit a beam of subatomic particles. The difference? These particles are much stronger than light, so they can do more damage. Also, phasers can alter how much energy they shoot out by changing how much energy it wants to emit. A phaser gun's strength can be changed by varying how much energy it shoots out. Thus, phasers can have stun setting while lasers can only burn.
That's why Star Trek uses phasers instead of lasers: they are more powerful but more versitile.
Complete Answer: They shoot out different kinds of fundamental forces
Phasers are one of the standard weapons in Star Trek. When someone fires a gun in Star Trek, and a beam of yellow-gold energy comes out, then it's probably a phaser. The Enterprise and other ships have huge phasers for fighting other ships, and I've even seen "drilling" phasers.
And before any of you geeks out there start bitching about disruptors not being phasers ... relax. I realize disruptors are different, but this ain't about them. I'm just making sure people with social lives outside of Star Trek conventions have en idea of what a phaser is. They're ray guns, okay?
What about lasers? Aren't they ray guns too? Yes they are. So what's the difference?
Play "Welcome to the Machine!" Play ... ouch!
Lasers all work basically the same way: a machine gets electrons in the stored energy "ammo" all excited (it shows them naked picitures of positrons) until they spew forth a tight beam of electromagnetic radiation. All radiation needs a particle to "carry" it, and electromagnetism uses photons.
That's right, lasers are machines that emit beams of light. They don't have to be guns or there'd be a lot less Pink Floyd/Led Zepp fans in the world. Ever spend a day at the beach and forget the SPF? You burned like a lobster in a pot. That's what a laser would do if it hit you, since the Sun is "shooting" light just like a laser.
How bad would the burn be? Depends on the power output of the laser. Weak lasers don't hurt a thing, just like those annoying laser pointers that idiots use in a movie theater. Stronger lasers could cause third-degree burns. The extreme would be a burn so bad that stuff melts or boils away to vapors.
Lasers don't have to shoot visible light. Any electromagnetic wave can be sent. Okay, so what's them? We're talking radio waves, microwaves, infrared light, visible light, ultraviolet light, x-rays, or even gamma rays. They're all part of the electromagnetic spectrum. While radio waves are so weak that they never hurt us, except when they play Mandy Moore, gamma rays can do some serious damange. No Incredible Hulk, just incredibly painful death.
It's called "strong nuclear" for a reason
As for phasers ... bear in mind that phasers don't exist. They were invented by Star Trek, probably because they sound more cool than the ol' laser but similar enough to get the idea across. So here's how Star Trek writers have imagined a phaser works: a machine uses subatomic particles called nadions to mess with the stored energy "ammo." These nadions change the phase of the energy and turns it into strong nuclear force; hence, phaser.
Strong nuclear force is basically gluons, particles that keep quarks together so they form protons, neutrons, etc. So, instead of a beam of photons you get a beam of gluons. Since gluons are more powerful than photons (because strong nuclear is more powerful than electromagnetism), a phaser is more powerful than a laser.
In the imaginary Star Trek universe, everyone started out using lasers. But once phasers were invented they replaced lasers. Why? Why did the US Army replace the bolt-action rifle with the automatic rifle? Because they're more powerful and efficient. But also because the new weapon is more versitile.
Set lasers for ... oh, there's only one setting?
Lasers use something called a constant power output. In other words, pull the trigger and the energy in the "ammo" is turned into the beam of light at a steady rate. You want a less powerful laser? Then build another one with less power. You want a more powerful laser? Build another one with more power. Kind of a bummer, you know?
Phasers use a charge output, which means the energy "ammo" is stored in a charge and then released. Pull the trigger and the energy in the "ammo" is loaded into the charge and then phased into strong nuclear force. What the hell is the difference? It allows phasers to control the strength of the beam.
You want a less powerful phaser? Put less energy in the charge. You want a more powerful phaser? Put more energy in the charge. That's why phasers have a stun setting, heat setting, kill setting, etc. but lasers only have a broil setting.
Was the complete answer worth it? Even I'm not sure.
Think you got a good question? Prove it. Click here, fanboy.
|