Yes, Hell is a spiritual and physical place.....sort of. The limits defining this are a bit different. Spritually, like spiritual condition, can be considered Hell (unfortunately differing translations give different words). It in a sense could be physical as in a literal place. Like it has boundries like a country, as a place one can exist, but I do not believe that this place could be put on a map of the stars, which is everything that can be defined by scientific processes. I do understand what is being expressed by a spirital realm. The best example would be like infrared vision. There some things invisible to the eye, until the infrared vision is put on. The Spiritual Realm is somewhat the same where if you had the right equipment (which would have to be a gift from God) you could see it. But the Spiritual Realm is also more complex than the infrared example, as to it does intertwine with the physical but is not confined by the Physical Realm's rules. And I will admit I do not understand this fully, but then again, no person on Earth understands this fully. So like a Scientific Theory or better yet a Law we can put this down as as much truth as a Scientific Law, as there is great evidence (mostly not scientific, yet some, but still a type of evidence non-the-less).
Now I do believe the origional question was if there is another weapon besides a "sword." Well, not as I see it, because the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God. The Word of God is defined as living. So the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God lived, or put into action. The "Sword" could be something as simple as a hug, as long as the Lord tells you to do it (as in his word) it is considered the "Sword" (which was the main weapon at the time, today it probably could be called "gun" of the Spirit).
And the Core argument, again, we can only speculate. We have no definite confirmation of this. Science is just guess work that people "think" is right. Science is not the TRUTH. While much of it is true, it is not definite. Science is still defined by the Scientific Process (which is why it is taught so much in school). Science CAN NEVER SAY THAT ANYTHING IS 100% BEYOND ANY DOUBT TRUE. All it can say is that a group of educated people have agreed that there is enough evidence to say that "we think this is true, so we will pretend like it is, and base decisions and calculations upon it."
Also, I would just like to say that when a question is raised about a specific religion, and a person has not studdied or does not believe in that religion, and the question does not at all pertain to you, you should not try to disprove the question or the beliefs of the person asking it. Beliefs are so personal, if the person is wrong, let them be wrong, they need to find out for themselves anyway, unless they ask specifically and you give the specific answer to the question. I find it very stupid when a person's intention is to try to tear appart a religion. All belief systems (and this does include athiesm) to date have some things that can be argued. So it seems very hypocritical and stupid to say that one religion is definitely correct when all we can ever do is speculate. Therefore the purpose of trying to prove a religion incorrect is just a waste of time and breath when the answer will be until the end of the world/death "We can not know for certain."