u/PositiveEconomist264

I'm writing a Sci-Fi book that's grounded in enough experimental and theoretical physics to be considered theoretically possible---I've already made up my mind on that, so any attempt at dissuading me will basically end up in an 'unstoppable force meets an immovable object' scenario (unless there's a plausible reason beyond just "it's impractical" behind the claim).

Also, I wouldn't call my book Hard Sci-Fi because that implies that the book is more focused on science than a story (or something like that).

Anyway, here's my idea:

As stated above, my plan is for people to be charged with static electricity upon entering a ship, with it having flooring, walls, ceilings, and other electrical components with equal and opposite charges (the fewer electrons that need to be exchanged, the more explosive the reaction---I really hope I don't have my sciences mixed up; perhaps there is such thing as too much research) to the people, so as to prevent any bursts of lightning (assume that electrical components are properly insulated and stuff). So, using a powerful electrostatic generator (something that already exists) to provide enough downward force for astronauts would (hypothetically) certainly be within the realm of possibility, especially for a hyperadvanced Sci-Fi society (which would certainly have the capabilities of making an efficient wireless electrostatic generator).

So what do you guys think? I've already ran this sort of thing by a Sci-Fi Subreddit, and a couple of them claimed that such a thing at least seemed like it could work (initially, I thought of using magnets with charged astronauts, but one guy pointed out that magnets wouldn't be necessary with static electricity already existing). Anyway, I figured that also getting a general consensus from a Subreddit more likely to be filled with physicists, particularly people with more knowledge of physics than me, would be a good idea.

So since it's the faults of whichever deities you may worship that gravity is the runt of the four fundamental forces of nature (if there are any athiests, you may fault science), I decided to make my own method of artificial gravity! At least, I think it's my own; I've never seen this method talked about (do correct me if I'm wrong).

So for all intents and purposes: it's electromagnetism (yes, I know electromagnetism and gravity are opposites; just bare with me). Also, no, I'm not talking about magnetic suits.

So, in general, anything without electrical currents coursing through it has a neutral charge (or there are electrical currents present, but the charge is so negligible that it's just easier to say that it's neutral). Now, we've all been charged with electricity before, such as when we've been victims of those who maliciously charge themselves on rugs, trampolines, etc., or when we're the malicious ne'er-do-wells doing that.

So my idea is that when astronauts in a Sci-Fi story enter spacecraft or space stations, they get charged with enough electricity for magnets to pull their whole bodies (including insides) downward, like normal gravity. And since everyone would still have the same charge, no ne'er-do-wells aboard could shock them (they'd just have to act very fast upon exiting the ship or station).

Of course, everything in the ship, or station, would need to be made of ceramics, or some sort of rubber, so no one can get shocked.

How does this sound? Or have any of you who know more about static electricity than I do found any holes in my hypothesis? Any potential issues (besides the nefarious pranks) and fixes (in the wise words of SkekTek, "every problem obfuscates a solution")?

Edit: I think I may have put an inappropriate flair thing. I'm not trying to break the rules, I swear; I was just going off of what I knew. I am open to alternatives that would better fit what I'm looking for.

So, as I'm sure we're all aware, everyone takes after their parents, at least to some degree (sometimes so extremely that the phrase "I've become my mother/father" had to be invented).

So, I don't have any children (unless you count pets, in which case, I have one -- he's a leopard gecko, and I love him dearly) because I'm rather young (recovered teenager; 18) and I have more self-control than other boys around my age.

Now, I'm not a fool; I know that children tend to take after the parent who's more involved in their lives and/or the one who they spend most of their time around.

Anyway, I'm writing a book, and there's a family in it. Here's a brief explanation:

• The father, who struggles to express his love for his wife and kids (not that he doesn't; it's just very awkward for him) and has a self-esteem so low that it's borderline self-loathing, but he keeps that to himself (really, only his wife knows that something is up).
• The mother, who is better at expressing her feelings, but she is occasionally tormented by traumatic memories of her past (because I know some people might ask: no, her husband wasn't involved), and mainly puts on the proverbial brave face for her children (only her husband knows exactly what's up, and does his best to help her through it).
• The older brother (older by one minutes, twenty-six seconds; in other words: he and his brother are twins), who takes after his mother, and is more outgoing with his mannerisms, though he takes it to the point of being unapologetic in them.
• The younger brother, who takes after his father, and is more reserved in his mannerisms. He doesn't suffer from self-loathing; he just has very low confidence in himself.

I would like to know how accurate this all is, particularly in regards to the children. Are there any details that I may be overlooking? How exactly would those personalities develop?

And just to clear things up because I know that at least one person will misunderstand: yes, the father is a good man, both to his wife and children.

In short: I'm writing a sci-fi novel, and I'm figuring out an in-universe laser gun (because everyone knows that without lasers, a sci-fi story is totally bland (not really, but still)). Now, I know what lasers are, and a scientifically PLAUSIBLE laser gun can't really be a gun. My workaround: a photothrower (basically a flamethrower, but with photons); a ship-mounted cannon; and a surface-to-space cannon.

I was thinking of having three types: one for UV, one for X-rays, and one for Gamma.

UV Type: instead of a soldier wearing a backpack with a canister of petrol and a canister of tar, the backpack instead houses a small particle accelerator that would "charge up" UV photons before being fired out.

X-ray Type: a space warship-mounted DEW that's connected to a bigger particle accelerator that "charges up" X-ray photons before being fired out.

Gamma Type: a surface cannon connected to an even bigger particle accelerator that "charges up" Gamma photons before being fired out.

How well would these work (particularly the UV one considering how easily blocked UV light is)? Also, yes, I'm aware of issues like radiation-exposure and overheating (again, particularly with the UV one), so just assume there's proper radiation, noise, and temperature shielding. Let me know of any other thoughts!

Edit: it has been brought to my attention that photons cannot be accelerated. How I forgot about that very crucial detail, I have no idea. But for clarification, my idea is that the particle accelerators would increase the energy that the photons would ultimately release upon the beam impacting its target.