Main Unobtainium Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

06:37:08 AM Mar 31st 2018
edited by Bhorius
This page appears impossible to internally link properly. The only thing that I found working was copy-pasting a full link (with http and everything), which, as expected, results in the whole thing looking like an external link instead. See edit history of this page. Any ideas why and how to work around this?
03:50:54 PM Mar 31st 2018
Tvtropes uses curly braces to link single word links so {{Unobtainium}} works
08:07:44 AM Apr 4th 2018
I see, thanks. Should have thought about it considering I did something similar on the same page earlier, my bad
04:20:21 PM May 22nd 2016
"[...] the Trope Namer is the mineral sought by the mining company in Avatar."

...Actually, if Wikipédia is to be trusted (and it does provides references, so I suppose it can be), the term may date back to as far as the1950s. Should this be corrected ?
02:38:42 AM Jun 3rd 2010
Are positrons classifie as Unobtanium? (They're antimatter, of course, so they're sort of covered already.)

The Asimov Robot books refer to them all the time, but I don't remember one where the story hung on a problem with them. So I guess they're not a Plot Device but (to use my favourite WS Gilbert quote) 'coroborative detail intended to add artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative'.

[Prepares for flames from Asimov fans. Actually I like a lot of (early) asimov but I'm ambivalent about the robots.]
07:30:51 AM Aug 31st 2010
edited by joeyjojo
If any thing they are technobabble. it's not the positrons that are important it's the fact it's an artificial brain. the positrons are not a substance in the story just buzz word Prefix. I can say this as fan: If he was writing the books today he would be calling them higginstronic neuralnets or Quantum cyberbranes
05:54:32 PM Apr 13th 2010
edited by Herbarius
About antimatter: "a microscopic amount = tactical nuclear weapon yield"

I would strongly debate that. I once heard, all particle accelerators on Earth combined couldn't even produce enough antimatter to ignite a match with its matter/antimatter reaction.

So, ...

the amount of antimatter all particle accelerators on Earth combined could produce = a microscopic amount

not able to ignite a match <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< tactical nuke
11:20:59 PM Apr 13th 2010
You can have a microscopic amount of antimatter, which is still vastly more than has ever been produced on earth, and hence has a tactical nuclear yield.
02:04:14 PM May 5th 2010
Isn't this a bit wrong? I suppose unobtainium should be some exotic meterial like "red mercury" 106th element instead of stuff that is expensive but available.
02:28:17 AM Jan 8th 2012
Red mercury was fictional, references were created by the US/UK as a red herring to throw off other nations' development of fission, primarily the USSR.
11:45:54 AM Sep 4th 2017
edited by GeekProphet
A single kilogram of antimatter and the kilogram of matter it is mixed with together produce about 43 megatons of explosive force. The amount mentioned in the note is, 1 x 10 ^9 grams, or 1 x 10 ^ 12 less than this, or about equal to 1/5th of a stick of dynamite, nowhere near the power of even the very smallest of tactical nukes.
Collapse/Expand Topics