NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.firingsquad.com/games/redalert2firstlook/images/12.jpg

This suit was inspired by the soviets. we created the Tesla Trooper suit. the suit has the ability to project 3 billion volts of non-absorbable Eletricty. the power is Converted and amplified Bio-electricity

starting price:$3,500 each.
and for those who do think nano-tech is modern (which it is) we have nano-adaptive camoflauge if you want to add on for free

OOC: Nanotech is not modern. If it was, it would be in use.

Also, there is no such thing as non absorbable electricity. With the right stuff, it is.

And with bio electricity, do you mean it comes from the person inside? Because that isn't gonna work. You need a real power source. Lithium Ion batteries, hydrogen fuel cells, whatever.

Nanotechnology is for starters a very modern technology...you're a dumb ass. They have nanobots for christ sake. Sticking purely to "modern" or todays technology is simply ridiculous. If you want to have 'fun' play post modern...Nanobots are cool.

I know they exist, but the technology for adaptive camoflauge from it does not.

I am post modern, but he is saying that NT camo is a modern tech, which it is not, which is why the US Army has put it as part of the Soldier 2025 program. Not modern.

to be correct bio-electristy is very good for this suit, becuase there is enough.more then enough the average human body produces 20 trillion bio-volts of electristy with the converter there is 10 trillion normal volts. more then enough to power this suit. and yes adaptive camo does exist ever watched James bond the new one remember the car. thats what i thought. so i short my suit is very real and useable.

oh you know that not much is going to change in 21 years. and the only reason they put it on the soldier of 2025 is they dont know how to use it right. so they are holding back

Modern suits use lots of little cameras to capture and project an image so they blend.

Yeah. James Bond. In one film, which I can't remember the name of but I know had Sean Connery in, there was a little plastic tube 4 inches long that could procure oxygen from water. Sure, everything in James Bond HAS to be real, otherwise, why would they let it be in the movie?

they are my suits you just claim them because you make the bio-converter

Your not helping- and who asked you for your imput

*Sigh* Did you even bother to research this stuff?

(1)The human body actually uses nearly all of that electricity, so using it in the suit would mean that your soldier would be a little brain-dead thing getting shot repeatedly. Aside from that, I think you're referring to the total amount a human generates in a lifetime . . .

(2)The James Bond camo probably uses a video-projection setup where a camera captures the image on the other side of the car and makes the other side look like that image.

(3) Read the top sticky. It explains why invisible troops are shit. How do you deploy your forces? How do you know you're shooting a foe and not a friend? And don't give me transponders, because theose can very easily be hacked.

(4) You would have very hard difficulty aiming the weapon on your suit.

(5) It would have limited range, because air is -not- a very good conductor.

(6) I'm too lazy to give you references for nanotech and electricity-based weapons . . .

Actually a lot of the stuff they had on Bond actually worked, for example, I on the History Channel they had a jet pack from bond, and there was the boat, and all that other 'neat' stuff.

Yes, but Bond also had a lot of stuff that didn't work in RL. For example, the whole laser cannon satellite-based ray of death setup has been repeatedly gone over on these forums and has been deemed impossible evry time.

For all practical purposes, the dude just stole a piece of shit weapon from Red Alert 2 . . .

Well . . .you could project 3 billion volts if the amperage was low enough . . . but then it wouldn't do very much . . . I got hit by 300,000 volts in Physics a few months ago with no effect . . .

Yeah, the comment was aimed towards the New Aryan State. But I knew that there was nothing like that, yet.

*Sigh* Did you even bother to research this stuff?

(1)The human body actually uses nearly all of that electricity, so using it in the suit would mean that your soldier would be a little brain-dead thing getting shot repeatedly. Aside from that, I think you're referring to the total amount a human generates in a lifetime . . .

NO THEY ARE NOT BRAIN-DEAD IDIOTS A HUMAN GENERATE THAT MUCH EVERY DAY THANK YOU. NOW TO COMPISATE FOR THE DRAIN WE INSTALLED THE AMPLIFIER. WHICH SOFTENS THE DRAIN.

(2)The James Bond camo probably uses a video-projection setup where a camera captures the image on the other side of the car and makes the other side look like that image.

OK, THIS IS A GAME TRY TO LOOSEN THE LITERAL GRIP A BIT OK.

(3) Read the top sticky. It explains why invisible troops are shit. How do you deploy your forces? How do you know you're shooting a foe and not a friend? And don't give me transponders, because theose can very easily be hacked.

NO, THE HELMET IS EQUIPED WITH A SPECIAL DEVICE THAT NEGATES THE EFFECT OF THE CAMO

(4) You would have very hard difficulty aiming the weapon on your suit.

NOT REALLY EVERYTHING PUTS OUT A CENTAIN ENERGY SIGNITURE. THE SUIT ANALISIZES THE SIGINTURE AND REAMPLITUDES TO ENERGY SIGNITURE OF THE WEAPON TO MAKE THE OPPOSITE OF THE TARGET. NOW I BELEIVE THAT OPPOSITES ATTARCT..CORRECT

(5) It would have limited range, because air is -not- a very good conductor.

TRUE IT DOES HAVE A LIMITED RANGE GOT ME

(6) I'm too lazy to give you references for nanotech and electricity-based weapons . . .OK

How exactly is the electricity non absorbable?

Actually a lot of the stuff they had on Bond actually worked, for example, I on the History Channel they had a jet pack from bond, and there was the boat, and all that other 'neat' stuff.
Yes, but the car was done either with CG or two large cameras.

Mirage/Weapons, whoever you are, I know what AdCam is. Are you so gullible as to think the Aston Martin could actually turn invisible?

Sorry to ruin your fun, but that was MADE UP. There is no system like that that works with nanotechnology, or photocells, or whatever. It's under research for the next few decades. So what if this is a game? That does not negate logic or human technic capability. If you said this was not modern tech, I'd be fine. But by saying this is modern tech, you're saying the technology exists now, not in 10 years.

As for the military 'holding back', why would they? If the US had a system that made their soldiers invisible, during one of the most unpopular wars of our times where people complain because to many of our guys on the ground die, don't you think they'd do it?

And if they already can, why are they offering 50 million to somone who can make a nanofabric that changes color? The Army doesn't pay money for something it already has.

http://www.firingsquad.com/games/redalert2firstlook/images/12.jpg

This suit was inspired by the soviets. we created the Tesla Trooper suit. the suit has the ability to project 3 billion volts of non-absorbable Eletricty. the power is Converted and amplified Bio-electricity

starting price:$3,500 each.
and for those who do think nano-tech is modern (which it is) we have nano-adaptive camoflauge if you want to add on for free

I'll buy 10 million of them for $300,500,000,000.00 Money will be wired upon confirmation. Thank you. By the way, does this suit have a name?

How exactly is the electricity non absorbable?
It uhh, isn't.

one word COVER
the tech is not ... you know what if you dont like it dont read my stuff ok good

Because the energy sig. is changed for a certian target now i will admitt if the target can abosrb then it will abosrb it..got me

I'll buy 10 million of them for $300,500,000,000.00 Money will be wired upon confirmation. Thank you. By the way, does this suit have a name?

it is called the tesla trooper

No, you don't get it. Cover ups are for prototype projects the US military doesn't want the rest of the world to know about.

If the US military wanted to cover up Nanotech camouflage, why did they publicly announce that they need someone to make a fabric that can change color thru nanotech, and would pay them 50 million dollars?

Oh, wait. Because there is nothing to cover up. Because the technology isn't there yet.

ever heard of a double negitive cover story. you tell them that you dont have it and that you need it when you all ready have it

Yes, but you don't do that when you offer 50 million dollars. Because the cover is blown when the people actually develop the thing and get the money. This means that not only did you just pay someone 50 million to re invent the wheel, but you've also exposed what you were originally trying to cover up through the development of it by a civilian corporation.

It's called logic.

Ok guys heres the deal... there is enough power in a single AAA batery to kill someone..... heres how YOU ALL ARE FOCUSSING ON THE WRONG PART!!!
people can take a lot of volts ... what they cant take is AMPS
with a converter you can decrease the volts to almost nothing (and draine your battery,) and increase the amps to something that will either incapacitate somone or kill ANYONE!

[techy on the job :)]---> :headbang:

also hey listen the military if it wanted to keep something secret just wont say anything about it ie. the 50 million dollar thing

ok i will try it i like him he's cool

TRUE IT DOES HAVE A LIMITED RANGE GOT ME

I assume it'll be like Red Alert 2 and have a range of roughly 2.5 meters.

-------------

As I said before, I got hit by 300,000 volts in physics class a few months ago . . . *is sad because he was ignored*

it is called the tesla trooper

Thanks. I still want ten million of 'em, though...

more like 3 meters . now how got ignored

Although Nanobots have been built, scientists and researchers such as Dr. Drexler of the Foresight Institute in California, have still not perfected nanotechnology. If you need more information google for the Foresight Institute and you will get a lot of information on current research in nanotechnology.

Thanks. I still want ten million of 'em, though...
ok.... they will be there in 1 n.s, day

what do i need to do to give an idea of a weapon? like can i just make a new thread or do i need something in NationStates (besides a Nation lol)

Thanks. I still want ten million of 'em, though...

Wasted money . . . it's just waiting to get shot by someone packing an AK-47. And note that one of its arms is unusable, so the soldier wearing that suit can't use standard weapons . . .

You need to understand the technology behind your weapon or machine. This thread is a very bad example of displaying a new technology or weapon, because the starter of this thread does not understand even the most basic concepts behind the weapon...

Also, you need stats on your weapon, machine, or technology...

what do i need to do to give an idea of a weapon? like can i just make a new thread or do i need something in NationStates (besides a Nation lol)

Research the tech behind it, unless you're like me and use minor magitech . . .
Look at people's storefronts, because you -will- be expected to provide a decent layout of stats and a general description.

what do i need to do to give an idea of a weapon? like can i just make a new thread or do i need something in NationStates (besides a Nation lol)


i can do it for you. just tell me what you want.

Here's a good example IMO of how a new weapon should be presented:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=342191

now i had a really good and well explianed store front i know how to do it but sometimes i get lazy and give very vage details.

I agree with FCN. No offense weapons tech, but Adromada, do some research about RL systems and theories depending on your tech level, and then NS storefronts matching it. weapons, do the same too, because you came in here and needed several other people to point out things wrong with this design.

EDIT: Vauge details were not the problems here. Not knowing what you're talking about was.

i own that company i bought him out back in the old forums.

then how about you all help in this. i am not the original owner of weapons-tech. it was given to me. i need help. so how about you guys help me out. by doing so you can help me not make usless forums again. ok. ( by not helping you will be aiding me make more forums like this one)

i own that company i bought him out back in the old forums.
I assume you're talking about Mirage... But that's kind of irrelevant.

If it was him that got things messed up, talk things over, and then talk to someone else (With knowledge in the subject, on NS) or do some real research.

I want 4 million suits.
---$14,000,000,000 wired on confirmation---

i am talking about you you seem to know what you are talking about. help me

ok.... they will be there in 1 n.s, day

Thanks. The cash is being wired as we speak.

Just as an FYI on the nano-invisibility bullshit... The Department of Defense is currently working on such a project and supposedly it is to be completed not by 2025 but by 2020. I'm currently in a summer program at Carnegie-Mellon University and they are pretty much the driving force of this invisibility program.

On to nanotechnology itself. Nanotechnology means something on the order of a very small object that is on the cellular level. A lot of the stuff on nanotechnology is pretty much theoretical. Hands on research and that stuff is pretty limited. In addition, a lot of microtechnology has jumped onto the nanotechnology bandwagon, even though the microtechnology scale is 1000 times larger than that of nanotechnology.

If you really are talking about nanotechnology, you should be actually calling it molecular nanotechnology, due to the fact that Drexler went anal and decided to distinguish real nanotechnology from those who jumped on the nanotechnology bandwagon.

There are several inconsistencies in various arguments here. I don't want to irritate anyone, but incorrect physics bugs me

1) True camoflague, like the Aston Martin in James Bond is years away, even if it is possible. Complete camoflague is, I am almost certain, impossible, but to a casual observer, I think it could work. The reason is that for complete camoflague, you would need a complete projection of the image on the other side. However, you would need 360º coverage for full camoflague. As far as I know, there is no way to both project and absorb light at the same time, which is what you'd need to do to get a complete image at every aspect of the object. There is also the fact that such an object would have to be solid. This is because to make a hole for someone to get in, you would have to divert some light around that hole. Now, you can't compress two beams of light into one - it would be like a black hole, and any information that goes into a black hole is lost. Thus, by diverting light around the hole, you have to bend it around the hole, which results in you creating a new solid part that needs to be masked. This process could continue ad infinitum. There could be some salvation in quantum thoery, or more specifically, the quantum superposition of many states before resolution, but I don't see how that would work, and this superposition collapses once observed, leaving one alternative: thus, I see no way to have full camoflague using quantum theory, which involves, so far, a random nature. But that is splitting hairs. Using nanotechnology, a passable camoflague could be established.

2) The human body is a strange organism. That is, as far as I know, it can be either very wasteful, or very efficient. Bio-electricity is, I believe, pretty vital, and unable to be siphoned off without some loss of movement, as an electrical potential is only used,as far as I know, in the nervous system. Also, a nervous impulse consists of a change of 40mV (or microvolts - I can't quite remember off-hand). This is set in stone - the strength of a sensation relies on the number of impulses per second, not on the magnitude of impulse.
It occurs to me that if you siphoned off some of this bioelectricity, it would come at a tremendous cost - you would effectively have to steal some impulses, which would either result in the person not feeling or being able to do violent (and I mean big/sudden) actions, or an inability to do small ones. On the other hand, the human body leaks heat energy like a seive with no bottom - that is a far more accessible form of energy, but is very difficult to covert to a usuable form of energy, and especially in a small space, which is what would be needed for a combat suit

3) You make great claims for you converter, which would seem to be make everything else much more feasible. However, of this I am most confident - that piece of equipment is impossible. I may be misinterpreting, but you seem to think you can take a piece of energy, electrical for example, and get more of it via this amplifier. This is creating energy, and it has been established by more that 70 years of physics that this is impossible. It is possible to convert mass to energy, as demonstrated so ably by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, and various other atomic tests since, but they also demonstrated other factors. First, a lot of energy is released by a tiny amount of mass. I think the Hiroshima bomb converted 5g of mass to energy. There is also a problem of the fission bombs requiring a critical mass of the radioactive isotope before a chain reaction occurs, and mass is converted to energy. In the UK at least, you sign the Official Secrets Act to stop you telling people this, so I don't know the exact figure, but needless to say, it's not an insignificant amount. I think it could be carried, but then there's the problem of the energy released being too great (again, a big boom), and the radiation from the isotope. The other possibility is fusion, which is far cleaner, with no radiation. However, we're still working on that, and one project (it was called J.E.T., last time I heard, but I think it's changed since) requires a huge device to contain the fusion process, and even then, they haven't been successful yet. I doubt, to be honest, that a fusion device would be feasible.

In the name of thoroughness, I should mention there is a theoretical possibility of getting mass, and thus energy from nowhere, but that's Hawking Radiation, and requires a black hole, and Lord, we don't want one of those near us.

4) You say that the helmet negatesthe effect of camo. There is the fact that such devices can probably be easily hacked, as a varying camo effect to prevent hacking is probably too demanding for even a Cray supercomputer. There is also the possibility of a malfunction, which considering that all this stuff would be very high-tech, is pretty likely at any stage. Transponders are no good either, as they may not work - at the start of I think the Afghan war, a British Tornado jet was shot down by an American Patriot missile system, despite the presence of the IFF transponder.

5) Opposites attract - for charges, at least. However, opposites can also do a whole lot of damage - matter and anti-matter give a terrific firework display if they touch each other. Besides, similar objects can also attract - gravity being the best example. The matter is similar, yet two material objects attract each other. Be careful of generalisations in such matters - there are usually flaws.

6) The American military are generally pretty rubbish about keeping things secret - Area 51, Delta Force being the most famous examples. Besides, something this advanced, and yet difficult to use, would be of more use as a deterrant, I believe. Lone wolf operations, in a sort of Jame Bond style, would not benefit a great deal from this tech, as the require complete secrecy, and the threat of a malfunction would be too costly to risk.

7) Andromada is right - volts have very little effect on someone, it's the amps that really screw you over. A current of an amp I think would be serious trouble. However, if you decide, OK, we'll just use a transformer and get high current, low volts, you limit the range of the weapon. This is because electricity sparks across air because of a potential difference - more volts on one object than the other, so to equalise the charge, a spark flashes across, and the charges are equalised, at least to a certain degree. Thus, it would be a trade - lethality for range.

I don't want to spoil the fun, especially - I'm for thinking of imaginative ways of killing the other guy just as much as the other guy. I just prefer that the ideas are reasonable, and I abhor incorrect physics. If any of my data is wrong, let me know - I don't want to be the wrong one!

Blimey, that is a long post! Sorry everyone, but once I get started...