Skip to main content

star wars - How much close control over physical objects is possible with the Force?


The Jedi can control objects with the mystical power called the Force without touching them.


In the movies you can see, that the Jedi or Sith are moving objects really fast and really well controlled from one place to another.


Now I'm wondering, why did Jedi or a Sith never use the Force to fight with a lightsaber, or with more lightsabers, or even to control other weapons like a laser gun without touching them? I imagine a Jedi or a Sith with 4 lightsabers around, all of them are floating in the air, controlled by him and the Force. Would this even be possible? What is the force really able to do?


Sean Duggan:




Or, as mentioned in *Kid Dynamo", why don't they just yank the supports out in a building and let that crush the people inside (or at least force them to devote a lot of effort to keep from dying)? Admittedly, Dooku did use something like that when he forced Yoda to divert his attention to the pillar.




Answer



A great deal


It’s possible to control the trajectory of objects very carefully through the Force, as seen, for example, when younglings construct lightsabers:


enter image description here


Because of this, it is absolutely possible to manipulate a lightsaber using the Force. For example, Yoda makes his lightsaber float in the air and move around (he also turns it on without touching it).


enter image description here It is even (likely) possible to use such a remote-controlled lightsaber in combat. This may have been demonstrated by Darth Vader in Star Wars #2 . He grabs a poorly-trained Luke’s lightsaber from his hands using the Force:


enter image description here



He then proceeds to use telekinesis to control it, making it float in the air in front of him:


enter image description here


And apparently to slash at someone’s face remotely:


enter image description here


It’s admittedly hard to tell whether he’s controlling the saber remotely, or simply throwing and retrieving it with great accuracy, but it certainly looks like the former.


As to why people don’t usually use this in combat, it’s simply that using the Force to control a blade takes more effort than using one’s hands. It’s like asking whether someone could attach a lightsaber to a polearm for greater reach: they could, but it would make the weapon harder to use. Especially given that using multiple lightsabers doesn’t seem to confer an unmitigated advantage in lightsaber-on-lightsaber combat (see: General Grievous), this would be an unnecessary exertion in combat with another Force-user. If, on the other hand, one is fighting a bunch of ordinary people and a very untrained Jedi, as Vader is, this might be a nice way of making ranged attacks.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

Which Doctor Who works are canon?

I have been watching a Doctor Who documentary and they mentioned that Paul McGann did audio stories so he wasn't just a one-hit Doctor (and that there are novels featuring his Doctor as well). My question is: is Doctor Who canon just the show, or is it like Star Wars where some books and audios are canon and some are not? The documentary also shows that before 2005 they did audio stories where the Doctor is female and obviously that cannot be — not the female part, but the show doesn't count any female Doctors in episodes like The Day of the Doctor . Answer Nothing, and also everything The definitive piece of writing on Doctor Who canon is this blog post by writer Paul Cornell . I'm essentially going to be summarizing his post here, much less eloquently, but one section I want to quote directly is this: Nobody at the BBC has ever uttered a pronouncement about what is and isn't canonical. (As I'm sure they'd put it, being such enthusiasts for good grammar.) Be...