Blaster firepower analysis

[Darth Spock]

Would be good if we learned that they can be used as guided energy projectiles.
Recently, the SW database decided to makes all proton and concussion missiles into non-solid guided projectiles.
That's some serious bump in terms of technology.

Indeed? I don't how that's going to work, given how clearly the solid looking "cones" show up entering the Death Star's exhaust port. It's funny though, if thats the route they decide to go, then SW has gone full circle into what TOS Trek sort of was. Sounds a lot like designer Andrew Probert's idea of the photon torpedo, I remember reading this quote, retrieved from memory-alpha.org: "I envisioned them as what we saw during the TV era, they were glowing globs of plasma or some sort of energy. They weren't giant capsules. I envision them as big, glowy, dangerous blobs of... scariness."

[Firmus Piett]

I'm not gonna do a line by line reply since I haven't the time nor energy for that, and it has been ages since I've participated here anyhow. I'll concede some of the points Mr. O has made but will reject or contest many of the others that others have made, and perhaps also a few that Mr. O has made.

When watching the trash compactor scene in slow motion it looks like Han is shooting at a panel, not the door, and perhaps Luke did the same. Perhaps these doors are indeed too tough for blasters to destroy and the stormtroopers used a breaching charge.

Some people deny power settings exist on blasters. Usually this is done on the grounds that we have no reference to power settings on small arms on-screen. Sometimes it is done so on the basis that high end firepower isn't being used when it would seem useful to do so. However, this is the same in almost every sci fi which has powerful weapons with power settings including star trek and stargate, where opponents often use things as cover which should be disintegrated or blasted apart easily on maximum settings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrmupRKfZc4

Some people claim that the "high end" firepower are actually the same firepower and power setting as the "low end" firepower, that the shot which struck Leia's arm is the same power as that which put a large hole in a metal grate. Iirc the opening response on this thread argued just that. This claim is absurd.


Others claim that since low firepower is used a majority of the time we should ignore the high end examples as outliers or inconsistencies.

The use of very high firepower usually happens in very tight situations where the blasters ability to punch a large hole in a metal surface or disrupt rock to the point that hundreds or thousands of tons of ceiling material collapse is absolutely necessary in order for the heroes to survive and for the plot to continue.

If E-11's did not have power settings nor the ability to put torso sized holes in metal, then Leia Han Chewie and Luke would have been stuck in the Death Star's prison bay unable to escape.

Some less intelligent people sometimes argue that the different effects are material dependent and then pretend they have a degree in chemistry in order to justify their claims, lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qms-9fxT6Vo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwoBF0eX7Zs

Darth Spock, notice that the low and high firepower examples often come from the same weapon without a reload, and are sometimes even demonstrated against the same target. The use of different ammo like real life would be a nice alternative rationalization otherwise.

I would argue that based on the all the evidence blasters must have low and high power settings. A blaster set to low power will have a gigantic ammo capacity and a high rate of fire. A blaster set to high power will have perhaps half a dozen blasts considering Han's little outburst on Tatooine, and a lower rate of fire, and probably a greater amount of recoil.

So the highest setting is akin to having a small number of explosives that can be used in a tight spot to destroy some terrain, blast down a door (but perhaps not a metal bulkhead) or overcome heavy infantry or light vehicular armour (in some sci fi's or real life, where vehicular armour is less blaster resilient).

The high end firepower demonstrated by stormtrooper and clone trooper carbines, as well as Han Solo's pistol and a couple of other weapons throughout the clone wars are roughly akin to a 40mm autocannon in firepower, and can fragment reasonable sums of rock or put torso sized holes into metal sheets / grates or stone.

http://www.galacticempirewars.com/blasters-2

At the bottom of the above article I make the comparison which I feel is evidently valid and conclusive. Of-course you are right to be skeptical or perhaps even dismissive of the breaching charge comparison, based on points Mr. O made earlier, but the first and last conclusions are valid: blasters are orders of magnitude more destructive than 50 cals and roughly comparable to 40mm autocannons, when set to maximum power.

[359]

Other objections to blaster setting include having seen that blasters, specifically the clone's blasters, have a two position switch that goes "clicky," and that we distinctly see that they do not change setting between seemingly mundane and high-end shots.

And as an opponent to multiple blaster power settings, I will say you have made some decent points for your position. I did reconsider the issue, but after reviewing many of the referenced instances, and several others, I choose stick to my position that the blasters used by the clones and stormtroopers do not possess multiple power settings.

As for how the high end and the low end could both be the same energy. I would address that as an inconsistency much the same as warp 9 has been shown ranging from 1,000c to 14,000,000c. Obviously in either situation it can not be both, and it's probably somewhere in the middle.

Once again I'll bring up the scene in TCW: "Death Trap" in which Boba Fett stuns a trooper and proceeds to destroy the min reactor with a blaster. Between shots he switches from stun to blast using a switch on the side that makes a click with the change (hense forth referred to as "the clicky"). This points to the clicky being a two position switch from stun to blast. Which in turn points to blasters only having those two settings.

Further the instance you referred to in TCW: "Legacy of Terror" as a bazooka-like effect we get a good view of the clicky before, during, and after the heavy shooting. It's in the same position at all three times and no one makes any motion toward switching settings. This suggests that blaster bolts, as much as I may dislike the idea, do react differently to soft vs hard targets as on impact with the rock they detonate and on impact with the "zombies" they leave thermal burns.

The supports they shoot out aren't much bigger than the bolt itself, perhaps being 30 cm in diameter. And since the bolt's detonation results in a fracture (with gravity powering the eventual collapse) a small kinetic explosion, like we do see, on the order of a couple of megajoules should easily deal that amount of damage.

So to reiterate, we have blasters both delivering megajoule kinetic blasts and hundred kilojoule or megajoule thermal burns on demonstrably the same setting to a target which seems to depend on the structure of the target. This makes a shotgun armed with grenade rounds the most analogous firearm to a blaster.

I don't particularly like material dependance, but a bolt composed of bottled heated matter could understandably react in that way just as well as it can spontaneously explode as flak.

Again in TCW: "Dooku Captured" and TCW: "Innocents of Ryloth" we have scenes where blasters are used to bring down significant chunks of rock, but there are distinctly no setting changes, nor changes in the clicky's position. This is a common theme, so I see no reason to accept that blasters must have multiple power levels, much less ones that reach up to hundreds of megajoules.

If E-11's did not have power settings nor the ability to put torso sized holes in metal, then Leia Han Chewie and Luke would have been stuck in the Death Star's prison bay unable to escape.

And similarly if plot did not mandate otherwise Leia would have died on Endor. This is simply an exaggeration and understatement for the sake of plot.

[Firmus Piett]

Okay, cool, at least you gave it some thought xD

I would say however as far as examples of firepower goes, my position includes ALL of the evidence, whereas your position excludes the very powerful examples as in-accurate, even when they are vital for the plot to continue (such as in the escape from the detention bay and into the trash compactor). I haven't viewed each sequence frame by frame to note whether the clicky remains in the same position or not, although I'm confident your probably right. But is this the only conceivable way the power could be manipulated in order to rationalize the orders of magnitude discrepancies in firepower? I think probably not. So the only real counter-evidence is the lack of dialogue or actions involving the actual changing of intensity on a blaster, and the fact that the stun to kill switch does not seem to include further functionality past that. But the fact that very powerful demolition blasts are used so sparingly is easy to explain as a consideration of ammo consumption (and thus we have no exploding ewoks).

As for material dependent reactions...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qms-9fxT6Vo

[2046]

Further the instance you referred to in TCW: "Legacy of Terror" as a bazooka-like effect we get a good view of the clicky before, during, and after the heavy shooting. It's in the same position at all three times and no one makes any motion toward switching settings. This suggests that blaster bolts, as much as I may dislike the idea, do react differently to soft vs hard targets as on impact with the rock they detonate and on impact with the "zombies" they leave thermal burns.

If the setting was demonstrably unchanged, then the explosion was probably the result of something struck, such as a fuel line for heating or cooling the queen's open-air box.

[359]

I would say however as far as examples of firepower goes, my position includes ALL of the evidence, whereas your position excludes the very powerful examples as in-accurate, even when they are vital for the plot to continue (such as in the escape from the detention bay and into the trash compactor).

This is a fair point. Let me reorganize my thoughts:

Being of the position that it has been demonstrated that blasters do not possess multiple power settings requires a procedure for unexpectedly high and low yields. First is the observed target dependent effects (this is considered observed once discounting a change in setting). Failing that all shots falling outside the range are simply inconsistent data points. However they are not simply discarded, they still exist, but are no more important or unimportant than other impact effects.

And to my knowledge there aren't any blasts that couldn't be accomplished with a 100 kJ to 1 MJ directed kinetic blast (similar energy to an M67 grenade or a full stick of dynamite, but directed). Which is what I consider blaster explosions to be based on a my overview of the matter across all the time I have watched Star Wars (I haven't done a detailed and in-depth analysis of events, but it is somewhere down the line).

Let's compare this estimate to several of the instances that have been brought up with regards to blaster firepower:

M67 grenade detonation, the item I compare the explosive abilities of a blaster to.

1) The Grate
First off, I do not think this is purely a thermal event, it's too quick, too directional, and has no residual heated or liquid metal. Sure there would be some heating, but mostly it should be kinetic. Now, the detonation above especially if directionally focused would easily be enough to cause the amount of damage we see or more.

2)TCW: "Legacy of Terror"
Now there are a couple times where the blasters are used to bring down struts and ceilings. But I think it's safe to say that a 1 MJ directed explosion would handily suffice to cause the demolition we observe.

3)TCW: "Dooku Captured"
A significant salvo of blaster fire breaks the cave entrance to, well... a cave :) Anyway, I would imagine a couple dozen such explosions would be enough to cause some shifting and a cave-in. Especially after having the formation be pulled apart from underneath by a Sith Lord not too long beforehand.

4)... Do I really need to go on?

I think this is sufficient, for now, to show I actually am not discounting much evidence with my position. Sure if something were way out of the ordinary it wouldn't be represented. But there isn't so it's not. In fact, I would guess that I ignore far more unimpressive events than impressive ones (mostly as they do not readily catch my attention).

And if you want some speculation on how the bolts can be material dependent and can detonate vs burn here's one. The bottling energy field is shaped such that when it encounters resistance to heat transfer (or something) the field collapses from that point.

Whatever it is it doesn't really matter. We know what they can and can't do, how exactly it functions, much like lightsabers and transporters, doesn't matter too much.

As for material dependent reactions...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qms-9fxT6Vo

I would say that we see a bolt hit a wooden wall that is painted white. Then we see a bolt hit a metal doorframe that is painted white. Different materials, different effects. There's even some smoldering flame from the first wall impact.

If the setting was demonstrably unchanged, then the explosion was probably the result of something struck, such as a fuel line for heating or cooling the queen's open-air box.

I find it highly unlikely that there would be such infrastructure in the ancient and low-tech catacombs of the Geonosian queen. Plus the explosion didn't look at all right for that, more like a kinetic fracture from being struck with a large hammer. And when it came down there was no sign of such plumbing.

[2046]

I was talking about the slaver queen, not the bug queen.

[Firmus Piett]

I agree that a stick of dynamite (submerged in the target) could probably replicate a lot of these effects, stick for shot.

[Darth Spock]

Other objections to blaster setting include having seen that blasters, specifically the clone's blasters, have a two position switch that goes "clicky," and that we distinctly see that they do not change setting between seemingly mundane and high-end shots.

SNIP

Once again I'll bring up the scene in TCW: "Death Trap" in which Boba Fett stuns a trooper and proceeds to destroy the min reactor with a blaster. Between shots he switches from stun to blast using a switch on the side that makes a click with the change (hense forth referred to as "the clicky"). This points to the clicky being a two position switch from stun to blast. Which in turn points to blasters only having those two settings.

Further the instance you referred to in TCW: "Legacy of Terror" as a bazooka-like effect we get a good view of the clicky before, during, and after the heavy shooting. It's in the same position at all three times and no one makes any motion toward switching settings.

Good observation. Unfortunately it came apart when I cross checked it. First off, in the "Death Trap" episode, Boba stuns the trooper with the "clicky" in the "forward/up" position, before shifting to the "forward/down" position to fire normal "kill" bolts. In every other example I could find, the "kill" setting was always "forward/up." More importantly, in the episodes "Deception" and "The Jedi Who Knew Too Much" we see both "stun" and "kill" shots used. In both episodes, the "clicky" was always set to "forward/up," both when they fired "stun" shots, and "kill" shots. As much as I hate this cop out, it looks like that is just a VFX goof, the DC-15 model appears to be rendered with the "clicky" at "forward/up" by default, save that one time it was shown close up as a plot point.

Past that, the "clicky" position still leaves plenty of room for a third or even fourth setting, at "back/down" and "back/up," following the pattern established thus far. Granted that is only a possibility, but recalling the scene with Boba myself, I don't think it offers definitive proof against more than just two settings.

As for material dependent reactions...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qms-9fxT6Vo

I would say that we see a bolt hit a wooden wall that is painted white. Then we see a bolt hit a metal doorframe that is painted white. Different materials, different effects. There's even some smoldering flame from the first wall impact.

Good point, the shot at 12 seconds in that video shows a light scorch mark behind Luke, similar to what was near Chewie too, and on a more similar looking material than the wall right by Luke's face.

If the setting was demonstrably unchanged, then the explosion was probably the result of something struck, such as a fuel line for heating or cooling the queen's open-air box.

In that instance two different blasters of the same apparent model were fired. The first delivered a bullet effect to a guard's torso, the second shot from a second gun detonated with a grenade like effect against the floor.

On the topic of the Zygerrian blaster, (word to the wise, watch how you spell that, I missed and got a bunch of google results for gay pron...) I'm still open to that representing blaster tech in general, but I'd say it definitely does not represent the capabilities of the DC-15. If the clones could match that blast by a simple adjustment, they wouldn't need to call up rocket launchers or use special tactics to defeat droideka shields. That blast from the slaver's gun appeared to rival that of the AT-TE blast we saw take out 3 destroyers in TCW movie, and seemed even more potent than the blasts from Anakin's fighter in TPM which punched through the shields. Again, I'm not inclined to write the slaver weapon's explosive round off entirely, but I don't think there is any way of assigning that level of power to "normal" blasters like the DC-15 or E-11 as typically seen in service.
One thing I have noticed though, blasters do seem to be particularly effective at dislodging rocks. When they're not causing cave-ins, clones like to use their DC-15 to toss 300 kg boulders up and out of the way, like we saw in "Mercy Mission." It didn't even noticably damage the stone or injure the nearby unarmored natives.... I guess that's the "lever/fulcrum" setting!

On a side note, I noticed in the recent Rebels episode "Vision of Hope" a new aspect to the usual "stun" setting. Sabine's pistols and Zeb's staff fire yellow bolts similar to the blasts from Luke's training remote in ANH, rather than the usual blue stun rings. The subsequent effect of several of these bolts being deflected into a storm trooper helmet resulted in it being knocked off its perch and left slightly smoking. It still doesn't prove multiple settings for blasters, but it does add a new layer of complexity and versatility to blaster technology in general.

I agree that a stick of dynamite (submerged in the target) could probably replicate a lot of these effects, stick for shot.

Personally, I never considered typical blaster rifles and pistols to be megajoule weapons. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure weapons in the megajoule and even hundred kilojoule range would blow people's limbs off and leave torsos as little more than steaming piles of hamburger. In that regard, the idea of blasters having even one additional setting beyond "killing bullet" would help explain some of the effects we've seen while keeping the gore level under pg-13.
On a slightly unrelated note, I noticed something I don't recall being addressed before regarding the negligible damage to Leia's arm in ROTJ. When she said "it's not bad" she was probably absolutely right. I'd say she did get very lucky, and a moderate portion of the blast expended itself outside of her arm.
Just a flesh wound.
I wuv yu! But yer back is dirty...
How much for the little Ewok in the window? WHOOP! Hello, that's some major scorching on the back of her vest.
I just thought I'd share that observation as opposed to voting for the idiot storm trooper using the "bb gun" setting.

Back on topic, I guess I'm still undecided on multiple blaster settings, but it sounds like a perfectly viable scenario, not to mention one that would clear up a lot of otherwise contradictory blaster effects. I sincerely doubt the writers specifically decided blasters have multiple settings, if they've given it any thought at all. Heck, if Leia hadn't been scripted to get stunned so early in the very first movie, blasters probably wouldn't even have more than one official setting! For the time being, I'd rather wait for more evidence to come along, and leave the two/several setting "clicky" serve as a chew toy for Schrödinger's cat.

[Mike DiCenso]

Nice screencaps there, Darth Spock. Interesting other detail there that I never took note before, especially in those last two, is that Leia's bandages have a fair amount of blood stains on them. That indicates that the damage done is not simply burn damage, and there may be a small projectile that also generates a plasma energy charge around it to help punch through armor (This also happens to be a long-running theory with turbolasers as well).
-Mike

[2046]

Scorching or old bloodstain?

And Star Wars blasters and turbolasers being projectile weapons would be awful. It's bad enough the way it is now, with the canon varying between plain ole laser energy and galvened bolt of nasty particles.

[Mike DiCenso]

No, I mean bloodstains. Look closely at the bandaging wrapped around Leia's arm, especially in the first pic.

It's definitely fluid stains, not scorcing (why would there be any on fresh bandages?) and the color screams "blood".

So, unless you want to say that Han wrapped Leia's wound with someone else's bloody bandages, you have to accept that what the blaster bolt did was punched a hole in her arm somehow that allowed her to bleed significantly enough over time that it soaked the material of the bandages. This suggests a projectile more than a straight up energy blast that would've cauterized the wound.

The only other thing I can think of that might still cause bleeding like that and still make the bolt all energy is that the rapid thermal expansion cauterized part of her wound but caused enough secondary damage that bleeding still took place.
-Mike

[Darth Spock]

Interesting other detail there that I never took note before, especially in those last two, is that Leia's bandages have a fair amount of blood stains on them.

Indeed, Leia's wound did bleed. Before the attention hogging "boob grab," Han first reached for her arm.
http://screencaps.us/198/3-starwars6/fu ... -12729.jpg
Resulting in fresh blood on his hand.
http://screencaps.us/198/3-starwars6/fu ... -12765.jpg

Scorching or old bloodstain?

I don't know how realistically the soiling on Leia's back represents scorching, but I doubt the garment had that mark when they arrived on Endor, and don't think enough time elapsed for blood spatter to have dried that completely and have turned that dark from her earlier wound. The discoloration really doesn't look like blood spray anyway. I really can't think of a better explanation for the blemish, especially considering it's not all that dissimilar in appearance to my old oven mitt.

That indicates that the damage done is not simply burn damage, and there may be a small projectile that also generates a plasma energy charge around it to help punch through armor (This also happens to be a long-running theory with turbolasers as well).
-Mike

And Star Wars blasters and turbolasers being projectile weapons would be awful. It's bad enough the way it is now, with the canon varying between plain ole laser energy and galvened bolt of nasty particles.

Actually, as memory serves, projectiles have been hinted at occasionally in Star Wars, the Wookiee bowcaster's quarrels being the oldest example. I don't know how "awful" such technology would be. It certainly makes more sense in my mind than mysterious "bottles" filled with plasma. In fact, something like a laser propelled projectile could clear up some discrepancies in blaster descriptions. Just as blaster settings is a topic of this thread, pure laser beams, and energy sheathed projectiles could each represent variations in blaster types. There are certainly times when the bolts couldn't possibly contain a projectile, but other times where it is possible.

Personally, I think a wider definition of blaster "bolts" could better explain a number of different effects that have been observed rather than trying to find a single, universal theory to explain all blaster fire. Not being able to clearly define blaster "bolts" with a single description may not be appealing, but in the long run, I think it is a lot cleaner, and more realistic to consider that what are colloquially known as "blasters" may include a variety of types. Much the same way contemporary firearms use a wide variety of "bullets," like soft point, hollow point, FMJ, HEI, sabot, buckshot, bird shot, etc.

[Lucky]

When watching the trash compactor scene in slow motion it looks like Han is shooting at a panel, not the door, and perhaps Luke did the same. Perhaps these doors are indeed too tough for blasters to destroy and the stormtroopers used a breaching charge.

The characters imply that where the door in the trash compactor is shot is irrelevant do to the magnet field, and given how the bolt bounces around we can conclude that the entire trash compactor is protected in the same manner as the door..

Some people deny power settings exist on blasters. Usually this is done on the grounds that we have no reference to power settings on small arms on-screen. Sometimes it is done so on the basis that high end firepower isn't being used when it would seem useful to do so. However, this is the same in almost every sci fi which has powerful weapons with power settings including star trek and stargate, where opponents often use things as cover which should be disintegrated or blasted apart easily on maximum settings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrmupRKfZc4

0) It's a bad idea to compare to settings during an analysis of this type because it gives the impression that you care more how the two settings compare rather then what they are.

1) We have no statements for more settings beyond a simple stun and kill even though there are plenty of times on both the large and small screen where such orders would be given for full power.

2) I'm not sure what you're talking about in Stargate, but in Star Trek we have the writers, producers, and editors stating that combat as seen on screen is not the reality of the setting, and we know the weapons have a multitude of settings because the writers made a point to show them.

If the writers or animators/actors never show capabilities then the device does not have them.

4) What is the point of posting the link to the video?

Some people claim that the "high end" firepower are actually the same firepower and power setting as the "low end" firepower, that the shot which struck Leia's arm is the same power as that which put a large hole in a metal grate. Iirc the opening response on this thread argued just that. This claim is absurd.

1) If that bolt had hit Leia's arm she would have been in bad shape, and possibly lost the arm, but the bolt was detinated by her camo.

That bolt is a prime example of poor marksmanship by a storm trooper because he was taking careful aim.

2) The picture you posted shows the explosion originating behind the grate, and in the shaft. There is no reason to assume the bolt itself destroyed the grate.

For all we know some idiot chose just the right time to toss a thermal detonator down the shaft.

Others claim that since low firepower is used a majority of the time we should ignore the high end examples as outliers or inconsistencies.

The use of very high firepower usually happens in very tight situations where the blasters ability to punch a large hole in a metal surface or disrupt rock to the point that hundreds or thousands of tons of ceiling material collapse is absolutely necessary in order for the heroes to survive and for the plot to continue.

High powered shots appear randomly, and we often can't see what they hit.

If E-11's did not have power settings nor the ability to put torso sized holes in metal, then Leia Han Chewie and Luke would have been stuck in the Death Star's prison bay unable to escape.

Strange how your own pictures show the explosion that shattered the grate originated from inside the garbage shoot.

Some less intelligent people sometimes argue that the different effects are material dependent and then pretend they have a degree in chemistry in order to justify their claims, lol.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here, but you don't need degrees to know wood, metal, and stone behave differently when exposed to the same thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qms-9fxT6Vo

You are assuming that all three walls are the same because they are all painted the same color?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwoBF0eX7Zs

1) The added context was helpful.

2) Am i the only one who heard a boom that sounded nothing like any blaster bolt going along with the big explosion?

At the bottom of the above article I make the comparison which I feel is evidently valid and conclusive. Of-course you are right to be skeptical or perhaps even dismissive of the breaching charge comparison, based on points Mr. O made earlier, but the first and last conclusions are valid: blasters are orders of magnitude more destructive than 50 cals and roughly comparable to 40mm autocannons, when set to maximum power.

A Grenade is an are effect weapon, and blasters are not

Bullets do not damage things in the same way that a blaster bolt does.
Concrete Block Shootout - 9mm, 45ACP, 5.56mm, 7.62mm, 300WSM, 338WIN Mag, 12ga
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih3nw4qVa1I

Rifle Penetration Test
https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=8 ... 1422579428

Ballistic Penetration Testing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYiNMIVxnFM

Weapons a touch more Blaster like effects though possibly with better penetration
AA-12 loaded with Frag-12 explosive shotgun shells
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQYp9fOJ9VI

Neopup 20mm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsBEQ-Pulvc

Notice how the explosive shells act similarly to blaster bolts

[Lucky]

Would be good if we learned that they can be used as guided energy projectiles.
Recently, the SW database decided to makes all proton and concussion missiles into non-solid guided projectiles.
That's some serious bump in terms of technology.

I know they've said there are "energy munitions" in the past, but I've never heard that said about proton torpedos or concussion missiles. Where did you hear it?