/sci/ - Science & Math

would lead to some epic leverage on a slash, though.

nearly all swords have a groove in the middle. Making the groove on the inside, rather than the outside seems reasonable. Even moreso if the tube was of a material other than steel with good resistance to shearing forces

Why? A lighter sword is always better for one thing, plus a liquid is not easily compredsible, and might take shocks better than a solid.

the second the sword bends the tube wit the mercury would increase in pressure and explode out.

>>3542736
WAT
The mercury isn't getting compressed. It's just in a hollow in the blade, not completely filling it so it flows to the tip of the sword when you swing down to take someones head off. It'll give the sword mad momentum. Just make it a broad blade to give it strength.

>>3542736
>lighter sword is always better

>>3542746
Executioners sword filled with helium = god tier...obviously

ability of such a shaped to withstand bending depends on the radius, not the interior mass. the thickness of the walls only serves to mitigate buckling due to structural weaknesses.

>>3542744
The tube is not completely filled. The mercury sloshes around inside of it.

It would probably serve a similar role to curvature in normal swords, giving quicker acceleration into a swing at the expense of stability. Probably to a much greater extreme and limiting the orientation of the sword.

Vis a vis
>>3542745

...I question the hell out of the notion that putting a bit of mercury into a hollow in a sword could affect its momentum by a non-negligible amount.

>>3542884

I'm thinking using a depleted uranium core on the sword would be better.

>>3542725
As you surely know filling mercury into a hollowed-out sword gives it an additional -3 nonproficiency penalty to attack rolls and makes it an exotic weapon while raising the critical damage multiplier by 2 and reducing the threat range by 1.

Now because executioners tend to use a coup-de-grâce in order to kill, thus landing a critical hit automatically they'd obviously prefer such a mercurial weapon for their craft in order to kill swiftly and efficiently.

Terminus Est is the Best

>post image of a sword with no point
>suggest a pointless idea for a sword
>mfw

>post image of a sword with no point
>suggest a pointless idea for a sword
>mfw

>>3542725
aww shit nigger, is dat some book of the new sun I see you have just read?

>>3542884
You're wrong, see pic.

>>3543346
You also, see pic. Using a denser core is not the point.

>>3543550
This comes to mind.

It's a "gunblade", as used by the protagonist of Final Fantasy VIII.

>>3543550
But while the quicksilver is getting accelerated outwards inside the blade the rotation of the blade would simultaneously be slowed due to conservation of rotational momentum, so the blow would be no harder than if you just made the blade heavier to begin with.

Really, I doubt that such a concept would be of any use in a real life weapon.

>>3543394
i <3 u

Are you guys all retarded
Do you guys all drink mercury
I thought so.
>>3543394
You're cool.

Use compressed air and a trigger.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa_NC-_fvKs like this. But with POISONOUS HEAVY METALS

>>3543698
Where the fuck is the barrel?

>>3543702
To my knowledge this is the chief reason why swords are made curved.

Months ago walking on the beach I picked up a funny looking twig with a pronounced curve that gave weird dynamics depending on which way it was swung.

>not a doctor, nor a swordsman

>>3543722
Barrel runs at the back and exits just above the tip. Couldn't find any pics showing that.

>>3543728
There's an effect, but one of the major functions of a curved sword is to reduce the amount of blade in contact at any one time, improving the cutting power. Katanas and scimitars have different intended types of strokes in use, but they both exploit this curved blade feature.

A spear is a better melee weapon for most situations.

Reading this thread.

Immediately think about Terminus Est. Notice a few other do as well.

Good job /sci/

>>3543750
Something tells me that these panels are taken from different pages.

But LOL, it's hilarious anyway.

>>3543722
I believe it's not actually a gun, but rather it just vibrates really hard on impact and/or it explodes or something. But nobody cares because it's a fake sword.

The metal is folded over and over when it's heated. To give it multiple strengthening layers. Also they add cardon to strengthen it. There is all kinds of recipes for swords. From how to heat to the sequence of how to make it.

>>3543772
Otaku bullshit. Folding the steel is only beneficial if you're forced to work with shitty materials. With decent metal, the blade will be much stronger and more durable if it's ground.

the trough running down the middle of a sword is to allow the sword to be easily removed from a stabbed human being; it's a blood groove

you wouldn't worry about that if you were chopping off people's heads

>>3543783
no it isn't, stop spreading this myth

the only reason the groove is there is to make the sword lighter, because it does not lower strength but it does lower mass

>>3543741
I never considered that so important, but evidently with advances in technology and swordsmithing, swords have increasingly been made curved to the extent that practically all swords immediately preceding the modern era (I think of japanese katana and western sabres) have been curved. Interesting fact: a katana is a sabre. It means a curved sword.

Rapiers excepted, but it was never a weapon of war.

>>3543750
A spear is to a sword what a rifle is to a pistol. Kind of. Maybe it's more of a submachinegun.

Picture: Progress!

>>3543767
Nope.

>>3543810
No fucking way. Is she some kind of supernatural demon or something?

>>3543801
>but evidently with advances in technology and swordsmithing, swords have increasingly been made curved to the extent that practically all swords immediately preceding the modern era (I think of japanese katana and western sabres) have been curved.

Because people wore less armor as time went on, just before the modern era (however you define it) you'd have Napoleonic style cavalry with a breastplate at most, the majority of men were unarmored. And slashing swords are great against unarmored men

it's not because curve = higher tech

pic related, all other cutting weapons are jelly of this one

>>3543821
THE PRINCESS IS A BOMB!

>>3543862
Sounds plausible. But would curved swords then be poor against armoured opponents? Straight swords stab better, but armour is there for a reason, and the chief prohibitive factor of making curved swords appears to be cost-benefit considerations. Both katanas and sabres seem to have converged towards a similar balance of stabbing and cutting power.

When I say preceding the modern era I mean cavalry has universally been equipped with sabres for as long as they remained in use, even though the useful occasions grew rarer.

>>3543907
They just stopped developing sword technology once guns became more dangerous.

>>3543907
With armor you want something that's not a sword or barring that a sword with a lot of weight behind it.

You see something like that in falchions - it's got a little curve but the weight is distributed so the upper part of the blade hits more like an ax

>>3543924
Weren't maces and hammers more effective against heavy armor anyway? Though heavy axes might fit a similar category.

>>3543928
>maces and hammers more effective against armor
>rune is a metal

>>3543928
You know what really fucks up heavy armor? Long maces with hooks. The hooks let you pull them onto the ground. Then you hit something with the mace.

>>3543810
>>3543750
The little girl is actually a robot suicide bomber.

http://www.manwithoutfear.com/issuesinfo.cgi?issue=209

Just in case you thought the writers lost it.

>>3543928

Flanged maces were particularly effective against foes using plate armor or chain mail which became common for knights in the middle of the 2nd millenium.

>>3543947
Thanks. I knew it had to be something like that.
>>3543821

>>3543940

Nah, halberd are far better suited for such tasks. Then you have both a weapon to defend against in coming calvary charges, a heavy axe and a tool to dismount riders.

I can tell that there aren't many folks that are good with an ax in here. So let me help with this a little bit. If you really want to make your hits count there are two more important factors: sharpness and technique. If you're not keeping the blade sharp, then the pressure is over a larger area and that's just waisting your efforts. As far as technique is concerned, you need to pull in on the downswing. Ideally this will decrease the radius of the hit by about 6 to 12 inches. It's the only really good way to take advantage of the stronger bicep muscles. The effect is twofold: as you pull in you get a squared effect on the speed of the blade, after you pull in your good hand quickly runs down your own blade or handle so that you can quickly lift it for the next strike. Yes, you handle your blade with a glove. You don't want to look like an actor and waste time lifting it in slow, awkward contortions. Hell, in the 3 seconds it takes stuntmen to do it the long way anyone can walk up to you and slit your throat. "Keeping your momentum going" is basically telling your opponent where you'll be.

As far as the mercury's concerned, you can do this with a simple weight on the inside that falls back and forth but the problem is still the same. It's a bit clumsier and there's a good chance in real combat that even solid swords will break against similar swords. Consider it a beam in bending problem. If they hit your blade with a solid version below that heavier point, it'll use their blade as a fulcrum and could either disarm you or break your blade.

Simple mistake nearly everyone in this thread is making.

An executioner's sword is not a weapon in the same way a guillotine or a gas chamber are not weapons.

They are not meant for fighting. They are made INTENTIONALLY heavy, with blunt ends (no stabby), and intentionally unbalanced.

You start the swing, and even if you fuck up, you've got it moving such that it's own weight brings enough force to bear to cleanly decapitate someone.

>>3544170

That's the theory at least.

>>3544303
Well, being an executioner does require some skill.