First a definition for this question, because there are many kinds of sci-fi out there and they sometimes liberally use cool sounding words without explaining them:
A disruptor is a kind of weapon that weakens, or “disrupts”, either material bonds (breaking a material into molecules), molecular bonds (breaking a molecule into atoms), or atomic bonds (breaking an atomic nucleus into protons, netrons, and free electrons. Almost like instantly turning into plasma).
Temperature can do these things, but the idea behind a disruptor, specifically, is that it happens through some kind of catalyst, rather than brute-forcing with insane amounts of heat.
Would such a weapon physically be possible (even if we don’t know how to make them just yet)?
How would a target realistically behave when hit by a disruptor?
Unfortunately, this is one of those fun ideas that simply won’t ever be possible. Even if we start with the easy one of just breaking chemical bonds, those bonds exist because it reduces the total energy of the system.
To “disrupt” those bonds, energy must be supplied, and to do it for even a small amount of material would require a tremendous amount of energy. Delivering that much energy over a distance just isn’t possible because atmosphere in between would also be “disrupted”. The disrupted material would also fly apart at high speeds and high temperatures. So any type of “ray” or “gun” would just turn into a bomb with a pistol grip trigger. I expect that the user experience testing would have lots of very negative reviews.
1/10: Stupid thing blew up my dog, half my house, and my damn car.
Look I was just trying to deal with a Raccoon stealing my trash, I didn’t plan to destroy half the neighborhood, this product is dangerous and should be illegal.
Disclaimer: I have nothing more than a secondary education level of physics and a keen interest in physics in general.
It’s common scientific belief that all physical forces are backed up by a field, for example, magnetism by the electromagnetic field, gravity by a gravity field. It would follow that the strong and weak nuclear forces also have corresponding fields.
For a disruptor to work as seen in fiction, you’d probably be looking to disrupt the weak nuclear force, and would need a mechanism to locally change the properties of the corresponding weak nuclear field.
I don’t know if there is such a mechanism available to us currently. Hopefully someone else has a definitive answer.
Is it a nice cabinet? I like a good walnut cabinet with at least 2 shelves.
This cabinet is truly spectacular—one of the finest you’ll ever see. It’s got so many shelves, folks, you wouldn’t believe it. Absolutely tremendous. Each shelf is perfectly designed to showcase your prized possessions. Believe me, the craftsmanship is second to none. These shelves are not just shelves; they’re a statement. They’re big, they’re beautiful, and they hold everything perfectly. This cabinet is going to be a tremendous addition to any room—nobody does shelves like this, folks. It’s going to be huge!
A conceivable way could be to disrupt the nuclear force of the target atoms, maybe like an anti-Pion/Gluon ray that self-propagates the reaction through the released energy.
(As we might remember, splitting the atom yields a bunch of energy, and uncontrolled such reactions go Hiroshima)
It might be controlled by sub-particle lensing, probably some kind of magnetic field, to be active at a specific distance.
For the reaction to be contained, either there’s a radially limiting component (air is not particle dense enough to propagate the reaction, or atoms not energy dense enough) or it’s a cascade triggered by the beam which stops when the beam stops (or the reaction gets too far away from it)
As I believe Pions and Gluons are their own anti-particles, I don’t know how we would go about doing this, but hey, that’s for Science!™ to solve.
I could see it being a kind of biological disruptor. Radiation basically does this anyway. It tears apart DNA and interferes with cellular metabolism.
As an aside, the ‘ever trustworthy’ Google AI suggests, ‘completely ionizing a human body would require an energy output similar to a very small nuclear explosion’.
I mean, every process requires an energy output similar to a very small nuclear explosion, for some definition of “very small” and “similar”.
