Tachyon?

[nerf5000]

Quick question re: weapon types and info texts. I've seen some of the armor texts mention Tachyon weapons, but I haven't actually seen tachyon weapon types mentioned anywhere other than the proposal for some rocket. Is that weapon class still in, or does it refer to something else and just requires cleanup?

[geever]

I think tachyon was a rejected proposal...

-geever

[BTAxis]

No, tachyon was what the particle beam weapons were once called. It's very old and obsolete terminology.

[Titan]

I noticed on the wiki all the proposals with tachyon were rejected. Why?

[BTAxis]

Realism reasons, I think.

[nerf5000]

Should we therefore edit the wiki ufopaedia entry for the armor to remove references to tachyon?

[nerf5000]

Also to comment on Titan's post, it looks like the tech was just changed from Tachyon to Particle Accel. the proposals that are under 'rejected' wouldn't work well realism wise with either tech, it probably just happens that they were rejected before the name change.

[odie]

I thnk Tachyon even in theory is inpractical and should not be adopted too.

Unlike ordinary particles, Tachyon's speed is defined as "increases as its energy decreases." This should somehow result in a possible FTL state (Faster than Light) which is not possible, except for the so call -> Alien's warp drive......

And i dun thnk we wan a warp weapon (we are not talking abt notrium the freeware game here.) And we do not want something that is an 'ultimate research' for the FTL engine (where we can integrate into hybrid manmade ufo) into a 'mere weapon in arms'.

Hence, i thnk it was a good idea to reject Tachyon and adopt other techs like plasma, or even laser.

[Kaerius]

Heh, I remember reading about tachyons when they had just been discovered, way back when, and I think the article basically said that they traveled back in time. The trace elements appeared before the particles themselves did or somesuch.