Magnetic Bullet Shield

[Iruka]

Ok, im a starwars fanatic, and as i was playing a game, i notised that the players could apply a shield field and be protected from bullets:eyebrow:. Now i have been doing some research on it and found this fourm, then i search for 'reverce magnet' and found this: Can a magnet be made to PUSH metal? So here i am wondering if you strip pyrolytic carbon to about 2 mm, would it lose any force from the orginal, i don't know, 1 sq. dm block, and, would it have the power to stop a bullet before it hit you?

 

Thanks,

-Iruka

[Sisyphus]

No, there's no way. Even if the bullets were made of some ferromagnetic material - unlike lead - which is the only way you'd even get repulsion, it would be many orders of magnitude too weak.

[John Cuthber]

Actually you could get repulsion if you were to use an alternating magnetic field. This would work for any conductive bullet. On the other hand the electromagetic coils and power supply would weigh so much that you would be better off hiding behind them.

[Mr Skeptic]

It wouldn't be too hard to bounce a superconducting bullet off a magnetic field, but a regular conducting bullet could in theory be deflected, albeit with much more difficulty. It might be easier to setup a high-speed camera with energy weapons to actively locate and shoot down bullets. I believe the army might have tried or be trying this.

[insane_alien]

that have that. though, it takes out tank shells rather than bullets. i'm sure they'll get there.

[foodchain]

They have laser based anti ballistic missile technology typically equipped to large frame aircraft. Such technology also has had applications attempted on ground based units which supposedly have stopped an artillery shell in flight.

 

The major problems with such are the amounts of energy required by the systems versus the reality of say the amount of projectiles and of course understanding what is what with say radar. In the first gulf war radar operators had to do some systems tuning because even mortars were getting picked up by detection systems.

 

On the subject at hand most conventional arms such as rifles produce rather high velocity projectiles, these can come from just about any angle in a giving situation, far more so in any urban environment. So a troop would have to for lack of better words carry another bulk of equipment that would have to produce enough of a field to not only deflect this, but say retain enough energy to continue working and lastly not interfere with anything he or she might be using actually. I am hoping that our troops just get better equipment, such as I always wondered about the application of carbon nanotubes or even diamond based nanorods for the use of some fibrous possibly body armor, then again stopping the projectile only means that you still have the momentum or "trauma" of the round impact. This also extends to vehicles which I heard though never verified that even a 30% nano based additive to say a humvee door greatly enhances its protective capabilities.

 

Standard ratings for ballistic glass is a good example. You want about 3.5 to 4 inches of such to stop a AP .50 cal round typically. Which I am sure would be relational to any field strength a magnetic system would have to produce.

[Iruka]

Ok, thanks for the reposts! I apprecate your activity.

 

Thank,

-Iruka

[iNow]

If that whole magnetic field idea doesn't work out, there's always nanotextiles.

 

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071031085135.htm

Engineers in Australia have designed a new bullet proof material which actually rebounds the force of a bullet. Bulletproof materials at the moment are designed to spread the force. The use of nanotechnology in design means those in the line of fire can be shot without a flinch.

 

<...>

 

A research paper published in the Institute of Physics' Nanotechnology details how engineers from the Centre for Advanced Materials Technology at the University of Sydney have found a way to use the elasticity of carbon nanotubes to not only stop bullets penetrating material but actually rebound their force.

 

 

More at the link.

[Encrypted]

If that whole magnetic field idea doesn't work out, there's always nanotextiles.

 

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071031085135.htm

 

 

 

More at the link.

 

Haha! Would you even need to shoot back at your enemies then? The bullets would just rebound back at them!

[qlue]

Bullets are generally made of lead with a copper casing. Both these metals are diamagnetic. When a diamagnetic substance moves through a magnetic field, it generates an opposing magnetic field. This will slow down and deflect the projectile. The stronger the field, the better it deflects. Using a superconductive wire to make a large coil, you could generate a strong enough field from a torch cell. At lease for a short while.

[AgainstAllOdds]

You know this is something that I've always pondered for years, and am just now finding this forum site.. And alas going to revive a dead thread.. lol.

 

The theory, I think, is very possible... The idea came to me wondering about the way light is affected when it travels through a prism. I mean, I've really looked into this, I just can't get the equations to all line up 100% yet. One side of the equation is; The force and energy of the bullet itself. and the other end of the equation the "ballistic based vest" has to equal or be greater than the projectile force. Rather than dissipate the force over greater area.

 

The issue of the opposing force is creating a field strong enough to repel, or change the trajectory of the projectile; bullets have rotational energy from the rifling of the barrel(spiral cut inside the barrel to cause rifling, allowing the projectile to fly further; gravity and wind also play a role in how the projectile moves).

 

Power sources with outputs large enough and possibly structurally small enough; Nikola Tesla was brilliant and wanted to give "free energy" to the populace. His "tesla coil" could have Voltage outputs of millions with Low amp draw backs... I was just wondering today if it were possible through crunching out his equations for the "tesla coil" could one make smaller scale coils and run many in sequence to [exponentially?] create a large enough output of energy.

 

Problems that arise in my mind from this point, I don't know, comes as I learn more. safety obviously, and with that possibility in mind could there be draw backs on electrical and/or heat output? and what could be done to equally use all excess energy as to prevent harm. Also would the output force against the projectile be bursts set up on a sensor or sensors? (to be completely honest, in a live fire fight rounds could come from anywhere, would the polarity of the made fields poles effect reaction? Could the dissipation of excess energy be consumed or let of through a fail safe valve sort of set up? or is there further possibility as to the use of the excess, if any, energy from the system? In the end the system must be in equilibrium to prevent any fracturing of said system. It has to equal zero or be stored up for later use... just a thought after writing the last few sentences, what if the excess energy would be let off in a form of projectile energy of its own?

 

So with all this in mind just a plane vest I don't think would do, it would almost have to be a suit of sorts.. would that cause more than one set of magnetic poles? um, or would the "main core power center" output the main and largest field? could such a possibility overshadow the other fields without too much unwanted augmentation?

 

Obviously another consideration is the cost of material might be large, due to need of superconductive metals materials to keep even flow; which also means the problem of keeping such material cooled enough to stay in the superconductive temperature boundaries.

 

It feels more and more that it might involve quantum principles. I will not concede to the notion of possibility. The more I think about it, though. The more sci-fi it begins to sound... But all in all it had to be thought of and imagined well before it could be conceptualized and put into practice.

 

Sorry to double post like this;

 

but the same I guess can be kept in mind with technology, military and war in general. Its sort of like the chess principle of being 2 steps ahead at all times.. the way technology is exponentially growing in all directions. The principle would not change if the weapons changed or "upgraded". The theory I think would be similar and more applicable, if we had energy based projectile weapons; as far as the analogy with light in a prism is observed. And I do not think that it is so far off either, just the application size has not been brought down to minute scales... just like how computer technology is continuing to make smaller and smaller components yet are being able to carry a greater capacity as its predecessors.

Edited February 28, 2012 by AgainstAllOdds

[JohnStu]

Good idea but not gonna work. Magnetic forces are super weak compared to force of a bullet. Magnetic force is the weaker force in all of the fundamental forces of world in terms of force exertion per mass.

 

A good bullet shield is ones my cousin has at his nuclear power plant. Those ones are put in choke points in case of an assault on the nuclear power plant. They are made of similar material as the frontal hull of the old generation tanks.

 

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

In fundamental interaction, magnetic forces are the second strongest, no? but the interaction is most commonly seen in photon based applications? I guess if your trying to make a huge magnetic field through electromagnets and the likes, I would wonder if the bullet has gained or lost any charge upon firing? If the round is or is not (+/-) charged upon fire, could a charge be given to it within a specific range and be able to effectively throw a round off before an unknown "point of no return" <- [being within a certain range too close for a reaction to have any affect on the objects projected course.] How many degrees of change are needed to change it's course?

 

http://en.wikipedia....tal_interaction

 

So far as known sciences comprehension stand, no its not possible. New discovery was never made by playing inside the sand box, but exploring the unknown outside.

Edited February 28, 2012 by AgainstAllOdds

[morgsboi]

The only way that would be possible, from my knowledge, would be creating a miniaturised magnetic field like the one we have in the centre of our Earth. But don't get your hopes up of having one in your lifetime. But what use would one really have? It would just ricochet the bullets that the soldier is firing.

[swansont]

Magnetic force is the weaker force in all of the fundamental forces of world in terms of force exertion per mass.

 

If this were true you could not have magnetic levitation.

 

——

 

The issue is moot, though. All I have to do is hurl chunks of concrete (or any other nonmagnetic, nonconductive material) at you to defeat a magnetic deflector.

[ydoaPs]

Actually you could get repulsion if you were to use an alternating magnetic field. This would work for any conductive bullet. On the other hand the electromagetic coils and power supply would weigh so much that you would be better off hiding behind them.

 

So, you'd have to have a harmonic shield? Star Trek is right again! I wonder it this was swanont's idea.

 

Also have a high-school friend who works in TV as a writer/producer; when he was with Star Trek TNG, some of the suggestion I made actually made it into the script.

[John Cuthber]

Good idea but not gonna work. Magnetic forces are super weak compared to force of a bullet. Magnetic force is the weaker force in all of the fundamental forces of world in terms of force exertion per mass.

 

A good bullet shield is ones my cousin has at his nuclear power plant. Those ones are put in choke points in case of an assault on the nuclear power plant. They are made of similar material as the frontal hull of the old generation tanks.

 

I think the assertion that magnetism is weaker than, for example, gravity needs looking at in a bit more detail: then laughing at.

The electromagnetic force between, for example, two protons is something like 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times bigger than the gravitational attraction.

Or, to put it another way, the magnet on my fridge can hold up it's own weight in spite of the fact that there is an entire planet worth of mass underneath, trying to pull t down.

 

And, for the record, no, I wasn't on about some bollocks from star trek.

I was talking about science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current#Repulsive_effects_and_levitation

[AgainstAllOdds]

I think the assertion that magnetism is weaker than, for example, gravity needs looking at in a bit more detail: then laughing at.

The electromagnetic force between, for example, two protons is something like 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times bigger than the gravitational attraction.

Or, to put it another way, the magnet on my fridge can hold up it's own weight in spite of the fact that there is an entire planet worth of mass underneath, trying to pull t down.

 

And, for the record, no, I wasn't on about some bollocks from star trek.

I was talking about science.

http://en.wikipedia...._and_levitation

 

Sir,

I really do wish and relish the talk of new technology and every conceivable possibility. But I must ask, do you believe in the existence of a greater power outside of the control of the ability of man? I am just curious for my own morality sake. Just like the nuclear bomb; technology, has not always had the best interest of the, longevity of existence, in its overall scheme. But things that came of it, medical advancement and the quality of life (matter of perspective)... Just technology always is a two-sided coin. I only ask because I am not you and don't know you, and I don't mean any disrespect or offense.

 

I have no formal college degrees or credits. lol. I have my high school diploma, graduated with a 65.4%, hahaha. I enlisted in the Marine corp, they offered me to be a nuclear physicist with security clearance, etc... I just could not shake the idea my country did not always have the best interest of its people in mind at all times...on a militaristic end why would I create or seek to improve that end of tech, with that thought.... at least I felt that way for a long time, the more I realize that my people care about their own...I was an infantry grunt until I was discharged... I'm 23 and I say that life can be better for everyone... not for personal gain.

 

 

That aside:

********************************************************

As far as superconductive material, what kind of system is used to keep them super cooled to such low Kelvin temperatures? I believe nitrogen gases or similar?

Can Magnetic levitation be achieved with liquids? the chart on the wiki page had water I think in its list of diamagnetic substances?

 

The tesla coil:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_coil

 

tesla had several different patents pertaining to this concept, receivers to draw incoming "electric energy[?]" and senders/transformers, the coil concept itself, for the most part. I was wondering if the distance between sender & receiver is made small, can the focus be brought down to a specific controlled point, rather than random uncontrolled electrical arcs as seen through its "novelty" applications? It all has to be tuned[?] when build to maintain the flow of electricity, and can be self sustained with the original power source unplugged or removed once it reaches a specific output of energy. With the materials available today, can his equations for building a coil be put on smaller scales than the bulky ones seen on youtube? hmmm, that thought just doesn't seem good enough, the voltage would be so small and only multiplied so much. But then you can put many tuned together to make up the difference, no? (I think cell phone size or smaller?)

 

And or a hydrogen fuel cell the size of a fanny pack or back pack?

 

It has to be small enough to be portable yet large enough to do the task at hand.... sometimes it feels like spinning wheels though.

 

Let me leave you with a "bit" to chew on;

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_functions

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_around_a_fixed_axis

[ydoaPs]

I enlisted in the Marine corp, they offered me to be a nuclear physicist with security clearance

 

When did the Marines get a nuke program?

[mississippichem]

When did the Marines get a nuke program?

 

I damn sure wouldn't want the jarheads to have access to the red button.

[JohnStu]

I think the assertion that magnetism is weaker than, for example, gravity needs looking at in a bit more detail: then laughing at.

The electromagnetic force between, for example, two protons is something like 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times bigger than the gravitational attraction.

Or, to put it another way, the magnet on my fridge can hold up it's own weight in spite of the fact that there is an entire planet worth of mass underneath, trying to pull t down.

 

And, for the record, no, I wasn't on about some bollocks from star trek.

I was talking about science.

http://en.wikipedia...._and_levitation

 

 

That is because of 1/d squared. Put the entire planet as a tiny ball and put it next to the magnet.

[A Tripolation]

That is because of 1/d squared. Put the entire planet as a tiny ball and put it next to the magnet.

 

You're still wrong. Gravity is BY FAR the weakest of the four fundamental forces.

[ydoaPs]

You're still wrong. Gravity is BY FAR the weakest of the four fundamental forces.

 

The proportionality constants are, what, 20 orders of magnitude apart?

[AgainstAllOdds]

That doesn't really matter though, lol. I'd guess a joint effort from all branches and the private sector to research and develop in all areas of science, that particular job title merely pertained to nuclear physics and the process there-in.

[JohnStu]

You're still wrong. Gravity is BY FAR the weakest of the four fundamental forces.

 

That depends on your definition of weak. Also, I never said magnetisum is weaker than gravity. Never.