So, let's say the blade meets some resistance. If it faces no resistance at all, which is sometimes how monomolecular weapons are portrayed, then that's because (by whatever means) it's not interacting at all with the body, so how can it do any damage? This is more of a "neutrino blade" than a monomolecular blade, so it's not very realistic, but it illustrates an extreme end of the scale. Leaving biology entirely aside, it depends how much resistance the blade faces.
I doubt there would even be enough of a wound for a drop of blood to leak out.Īm I wrong? If not, how thick would the part of the weapon behind the blade need to be to create enough separation between intact body tissues that the wound would be visible and large enough to cause severe bleeding or amputation? And at that point, would there be any difference between an exotic monowire blade and a very sharp conventional sword? Severed molecular bonds should reattach even more quickly due to Van der Waals interactions. My guess is that this sort of damage would be repaired almost immediately by natural processes, with any actual gaps caused by cell destruction filled in by replacements. I don't question the monowire's ability to cut, only whether the cut would be meaningful.Ī true monomolecular blade might be so thin that it could pass through the interstitial spaces between many cells. My question can be considered an expansion of this question, but dealing more with the effects of the wound. Or, phrased another way, how thick would the blade behind the cutting edge need to be in order to cause significant and lasting damage to a human body?