question stems from the following answer on SciFi StackExchange: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/6404/in-stargate-is-there-an-in-universe-explanation-of-the-cumulative-effect-of-zat/6405#6405
This answer was basically an attempt to propose (in very general terms) a "realistic" implementation of a Zat'nik'tel (Zat guns) in "Stargate SG-1" sci-fi show that have the same effects as those in a show.
The effects shown are:
- First shot stuns the victim
- Second shot kills the victim
- Third shot disintegrates the body of the victim completely.
The answerer tried to explain the first two effects with a certain degree of plausibility by the fact that the Zat gun fires an electron beam. A first shot overwhelms human neural system with the electric charge, the second overloads it to death with additional charge. So far so plausible, at least for certain values of plausible. For the purposes of this question let's assume these work as described.
The problem - and the meat of my actual Physics question - is the fact that - to explain the disintegration effect of a third shot - the answerer proposed that the gun fires not electrons but positrons.
This seems like a completely unworkable approach to me, for 3 reasons:
First of all, positrons would only annihilate the electrons in victim's body. NOT protons and neutrons. I don't think that would lead to disintegration effect.
Second, being a "ray gun", wouldn't the annihilation happen in the small area of the ray's impact on the body, NOT affecting the entire body?
Most importantly, it seems to me that if the ray gun emits positrons, it would NOT have the original 2 effects attributed to electron-emitting energy weapon. Namely, would not stun and then kill the victim by overloading the neural system with the electrical charge.
Making the assumption that we can somehow make a positron based energy weapon, are the 3 concerns above regarding its effects NOT being the same as SG-1's Zat gun correct assuming all the standard physics laws?