Talk:Dark Matter Laser/@comment-25187032-20140716144406

"It is technically impossible to fire projectiles of dark matter and cause harm since it does not react with normal matter, so in real life this weapon would be useless."

This is a moronic statement.

Dark matter is called "dark matter" because *a* theory postulates the existence of more matter than we can account for, therefore the matter we can't see is considered 'dark'- as in 'not visible'. The properties of this theoretical matter (note: there are alternative theories to account for the observed discrepencies for which dark matter theory was formulated, which don't postulate the existence of dark matter at all) are entirely a mystery, except that if it exists, it *does* interact gravitationally.

The stipulation that it does not interact with normal matter is unfounded, and absurd as stating that 'the invisible man is green'. The most compelling arguments for dark matter suggest that it may consist of WIMPs - to make assumptions about the properties of a beam weapon utilising weakly-interacting massive particles is preposterous.

Of course, rather than being a dark matter lasers, it would make far more sense to call them 'dark energy lasers', as lasers are coherent energy beams. However, lasers would not have such limited range, so it's safe to assume that they are in fact dark matter particle beams.

Ultimately, comparing a ridiculous weapon (among several ridiculous weapons) in a sci-fi-themed game to the real-world application of theoretical physics while ignoring the technical error in the naming of the weapon... well, that's just stupid.

In the real world, lasers don't suddenly disappear after a few miles in a vacuum. In the real world, Raccoons make no sense at all. In the real world, gigantic asteroids would obliterate orbital stations, jump gates, and ships like flies striking a windscreen, and would certainly not just be sitting statically around in space waiting to be mined. In the real world, ship's shields make no sense. In the real world, cutting thrust in a vacuum would result in the craft continuing at the velocity achieved by the application of thrust - your ship wouldn't just slow down to an apparently universally-enforced speed limit.

You shouldn't make comparisons to 'the real world' without being comprehensive or accurate. It's irritating.