(12-28-2015, 12:42 AM)Davepeta Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 12:13 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ]That reminds me, what's been happening with the EMDrive lately?
NASA hasn't bothered announcing anything on it yet. They probably know whether it works or not, but they haven't bothered saying anything official about it.
The EM drive only produces a tiny amount of thrust anyway. Its great for keeping communications satellites in their proper positions longer than possible with any other propulsion system, but the extremely tiny thrust makes it all but impractical for anything else we might want it for. Though if we can boost the thrust produced and decrease the energy requirement, then hoverboards and wheel-less cars might become a practicality using it to provide lift.
Fairly sure they have a scale model of the Alcubierre drive- aka star trek warp drive.
They devised an experiment to measure how strong of a field it made using two laser beams- one passed through the field and one passed around it, but calibrated so that a pulse of light takes the exact same amount of time for each of the two paths.
With the device active, the beam of light passed through the device's field arrived sooner than the beam that was the control path.
However there are two big problems with the technology.
The first is the energy requirement needed to move a large object. Just to operate that tiny concept demonstrator unit requires a pretty significant amount of power, which doesn't scale in any easy to deal with way.
The second is that according to some sources, the device that generates the distortion field has to exist outside that field to work properly- thus in effect you have to have a FTL capable vehicle to build a FTL capable vehicle.
Though perhaps we could work around this to some extent in the form of a hyperspace conduit as often seen in scifi, but this would be a tremendous undertaking to build to the tune of thousands of years to construct and requiring multiple planets worth of resources.
(12-28-2015, 01:44 AM)OdinYggd Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 12:42 AM)Davepeta Wrote: [ -> ]NASA hasn't bothered announcing anything on it yet. They probably know whether it works or not, but they haven't bothered saying anything official about it.
The EM drive only produces a tiny amount of thrust anyway. Its great for keeping communications satellites in their proper positions longer than possible with any other propulsion system, but the extremely tiny thrust makes it all but impractical for anything else we might want it for. Though if we can boost the thrust produced and decrease the energy requirement, then hoverboards and wheel-less cars might become a practicality using it to provide lift.
Fairly sure they have a scale model of the Alcubierre drive- aka star trek warp drive.
They devised an experiment to measure how strong of a field it made using two laser beams- one passed through the field and one passed around it, but calibrated so that a pulse of light takes the exact same amount of time for each of the two paths.
With the device active, the beam of light passed through the device's field arrived sooner than the beam that was the control path.
However there are two big problems with the technology.
The first is the energy requirement needed to move a large object. Just to operate that tiny concept demonstrator unit requires a pretty significant amount of power, which doesn't scale in any easy to deal with way.
The second is that according to some sources, the device that generates the distortion field has to exist outside that field to work properly- thus in effect you have to have a FTL capable vehicle to build a FTL capable vehicle.
Though perhaps we could work around this to some extent in the form of a hyperspace conduit as often seen in scifi, but this would be a tremendous undertaking to build to the tune of thousands of years to construct and requiring multiple planets worth of resources.
As far as I know, the EM Drive doesn't actually take that much power... They have only tested it at a few watts as well.
Imagine if it has some strange effect like its effectiveness scaling exponentially to its power input. Unlikely, but who knows.
Either way, if it actually works, (which it apparently does) it would be a pretty big thing.
any soft vs hard sci-fi debate always winds up bothering me because any hard sci-fi fan will get very "no fun allowed" on anything that isn't 100% scientifically plausible function, so fuck me right? And anyone else with a complaint to lodge will complain about how soft sci-fi is always baseless space magic everywhere, so fuck me right?
I enjoy grounding things in reality but I get variably liberal with things for the sake of keeping everything cool and interesting.
(12-28-2015, 01:56 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]I enjoy grounding things in reality but I get variably liberal with things for the sake of keeping everything cool and interesting.
Which is, strangely, what I would like to do with Plan B: keep it reasonable but occasionally bend sensible laws in the name of fun.
(12-28-2015, 01:56 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]any soft vs hard sci-fi debate always winds up bothering me because any hard sci-fi fan will get very "no fun allowed" on anything that isn't 100% scientifically plausible function, so fuck me right? And anyone else with a complaint to lodge will complain about how soft sci-fi is always baseless space magic everywhere, so fuck me right?
I enjoy grounding things in reality but I get variably liberal with things for the sake of keeping everything cool and interesting.
Same for me basically. What I don't like about too hard sci-fi is that, in it, everything is always fucked.
Just like the original serious RP plan.
I guess our civilisation not turning into a highly corrupt place or a futuristic dictatorship just isn't realistic.
(12-28-2015, 02:07 AM)SilverOtter Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 01:56 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]I enjoy grounding things in reality but I get variably liberal with things for the sake of keeping everything cool and interesting.
Which is, strangely, what I would like to do with Plan B: keep it reasonable but occasionally bend sensible laws in the name of fun.
should I dust off the old mechs I designed for you?
(12-28-2015, 02:10 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 01:56 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]any soft vs hard sci-fi debate always winds up bothering me because any hard sci-fi fan will get very "no fun allowed" on anything that isn't 100% scientifically plausible function, so fuck me right? And anyone else with a complaint to lodge will complain about how soft sci-fi is always baseless space magic everywhere, so fuck me right?
I enjoy grounding things in reality but I get variably liberal with things for the sake of keeping everything cool and interesting.
Same for me basically. What I don't like about too hard sci-fi is that, in it, everything is always fucked. Just like the original serious RP plan.
I guess our civilisation not turning into a highly corrupt place or a futuristic dictatorship just isn't realistic.
mostly I just lament the loss of all the coolest parts of softer sci-fi, no exciting space battles because it's always flying scaffolds firing railguns from 10+ AUs away from each other and nobody uses fighters or even drones because they're slow, expensive, and worthless, no effective energy weapons because the power demands are unreasonable, no awesome hovertanks or powered armor because everybody will just kinetic strike planets back to the stone age instead of sending invasions down, no awesome grand space stations or ships because they're impractical and fragile, so on and so forth.
(12-28-2015, 02:13 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:07 AM)SilverOtter Wrote: [ -> ]Which is, strangely, what I would like to do with Plan B: keep it reasonable but occasionally bend sensible laws in the name of fun.
should I dust off the old mechs I designed for you?
Sit down space cowboy, everyone's supposed to be the
crew of the ship, not the main cast from Aliens. Most of the halls can't fit anything bigger than a extremely heavy battlesuit anyways, so you'd have to be okay with the machine vs. nature battles going down in the open space of the defense fighter bay. There's enough vents in there for a fair fight anyways.
(12-28-2015, 02:13 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:10 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ]Same for me basically. What I don't like about too hard sci-fi is that, in it, everything is always fucked. Just like the original serious RP plan.
I guess our civilisation not turning into a highly corrupt place or a futuristic dictatorship just isn't realistic.
mostly I just lament the loss of all the coolest parts of softer sci-fi, no exciting space battles because it's always flying scaffolds firing railguns from 10+ AUs away from each other and nobody uses fighters or even drones because they're slow, expensive, and worthless, no effective energy weapons because the power demands are unreasonable, no awesome hovertanks or powered armor because everybody will just kinetic strike planets back to the stone age instead of sending invasions down, no awesome grand space stations or ships because they're impractical and fragile, so on and so forth.
...And of course, no FTL.
To me, Sci-Fi isn't about the things we think aren't possible, it is about the things that could be possible.
(12-28-2015, 02:18 AM)SilverOtter Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:13 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]should I dust off the old mechs I designed for you?
Sit down space cowboy, everyone's supposed to be the crew of the ship, not the main cast from Aliens. Most of the halls can't fit anything bigger than a extremely heavy battlesuit anyways, so you'd have to be okay with the machine vs. nature battles going down in the open space of the defense fighter bay. There's enough vents in there for a fair fight anyways.
But I still love the Stalker.
(12-28-2015, 02:19 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:13 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]mostly I just lament the loss of all the coolest parts of softer sci-fi, no exciting space battles because it's always flying scaffolds firing railguns from 10+ AUs away from each other and nobody uses fighters or even drones because they're slow, expensive, and worthless, no effective energy weapons because the power demands are unreasonable, no awesome hovertanks or powered armor because everybody will just kinetic strike planets back to the stone age instead of sending invasions down, no awesome grand space stations or ships because they're impractical and fragile, so on and so forth.
...And of course, no FTL.
To me, Sci-Fi isn't about the things we think aren't possible, it is about the things that could be possible.
to me sci-fi is just about the things we want to be possible.
(12-28-2015, 02:22 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:19 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ]...And of course, no FTL.
To me, Sci-Fi isn't about the things we think aren't possible, it is about the things that could be possible.
to me sci-fi is just about the things we want to be possible.
That too. But too much of that would get you to fantasy again.
(12-28-2015, 02:25 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:22 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]to me sci-fi is just about the things we want to be possible.
That too. But too much of that would get you to fantasy again.
well it's a sort of "soft rule" that you have to keep things grounded in reality, which means it's less of an actual rule and more of a strong suggestion.
(12-28-2015, 02:29 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 02:25 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: [ -> ]That too. But too much of that would get you to fantasy again.
well it's a sort of "soft rule" that you have to keep things grounded in reality, which means it's less of an actual rule and more of a strong suggestion.
Stop trying to explain what you mean.
I get it and I agree.
Man motherboard shopping is the worst after a holiday
There was nothing in stock, and the ones that were didn't have free shipping
so I was playing Fallout, raided the national guard armory, walked out and a sentry bot instantly went all "YOU HAVE TWO SECONDS TO COMPLY" on me so I panicked and started taking a shitload of drugs and then the game crashed.
Psychojet, not even once.
(12-28-2015, 05:54 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]so I was playing Fallout, raided the national guard armory, walked out and a sentry bot instantly went all "YOU HAVE TWO SECONDS TO COMPLY" on me so I panicked and started taking a shitload of drugs and then the game crashed.
Psychojet, not even once.
even your PC cant handle the amount of drugs(am I the only one with doesnt use drugs in FO4?(except radX cause that's crucial in some parts))
so I've just learned how insane a single hit of psycho makes you.
I get the feeling I will be taking a lot more of this stuff in the future.
(12-28-2015, 06:00 AM)SCN-3_NULL Wrote: [ -> ] (12-28-2015, 05:54 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]so I was playing Fallout, raided the national guard armory, walked out and a sentry bot instantly went all "YOU HAVE TWO SECONDS TO COMPLY" on me so I panicked and started taking a shitload of drugs and then the game crashed.
Psychojet, not even once.
even your PC cant handle the amount of drugs(am I the only one with doesnt use drugs in FO4?(except radX cause that's crucial in some parts))
mentats and buffout are...niche, but psycho and jet? holy shit. jet is basically 10 seconds of everyone but you moving in slow-mo, which can be huge, and psycho is +25% to both damage dealt and damage resistance, which is INSANE.
(12-28-2015, 06:06 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]
so I've just learned how insane a single hit of psycho makes you.
I get the feeling I will be taking a lot more of this stuff in the future.
(12-28-2015, 06:00 AM)SCN-3_NULL Wrote: [ -> ]even your PC cant handle the amount of drugs(am I the only one with doesnt use drugs in FO4?(except radX cause that's crucial in some parts))
mentats and buffout are...niche, but psycho and jet? holy shit. jet is basically 10 seconds of everyone but you moving in slow-mo, which can be huge, and psycho is +25% to both damage dealt and damage resistance, which is INSANE.
The combined drugs are even better.
Like psychojet is just 1 psycho and 1 jet and it gives you 15 seconds slow mo and 35% bonus damage (I think still only 25% damage resistance). It's more potent than just taking 1 psycho and 1 jet, and more compact.
I'm gonna pick my German lessons on duolingo back up. Dropped them over the summer and never started back up.
Also trinkt will never not trip me up god damn that word.
(12-28-2015, 07:03 AM)Surge Wrote: [ -> ]I'm gonna pick my German lessons on duolingo back up. Dropped them over the summer and never started back up.
Also trinkt will never not trip me up god damn that word.
You reminded me that I still haven't used the app at all
What language should I do, guys?