NationStates Jolt Archive

It's good ole' Eraclea here.

If you have an FT nation, have you ever actually considered what weapons do what and how? Namely this whole Laser/Phaser/Maser and even tractor beam or any other energy-based system works?

To first build a basic model for my nation, I wanted a strong physics backed reality in which to be able to build upon. The more and more I looked into this, the more every FT NS nation seems to be utterly godmodding.

The most critical arguement is towards Star Wars fans, now the fan-made site using non-Lucas backed numbers is about as well written as a three year old's ideas on physics. Correction...a bug's ideas on physics.

I've never seen a larger pile of fake information (too blatently wrong to even begin to consider mistakes)! SD.net deserves a slap in the face for this. For I am blaming the collective stupidity of THEIR USERS on Nationstates.

If you dissect the information, almost everything is wrong. Though let's start with laser weaponry (since this is the focus of this topic at the moment).

First thing: Plasma weapons.

If you use these things you are SERIOUSLY in need of a reality check. Plasma does not last long. If you are using it on a planet or even in space, you have less then .000001 seconds to hit that target (1 micro-second) to even have a chance of doing any damage realistically with even weak shields.

Shields will make all your plasma weapons absolutely WORTHLESS. The shield does not need to asborb any heat, as long as it acts as a solid barrier (or even less) and is capable of holding the plasma back for .0001 seconds that plasma attack (even very large weapons) will simply fizzle out. You'd need mass that would be sufficent to keep the nuclear fusion from gravity working on its OWN to even consider the power displayed on many capital ships. Which means they are too hot, too massive and probably just too dense to even fire, let alone reach the speed needed to do damage in the fraction of a second to work.

Not happening on the FT level.

Masers.

Have you even began to look at what source of energy you are using for this 'weapon'. Also, you should be slapped and bludgeoned to death for considering that at relative outputs Masers are better weapons then Lasers. ITS THE SAME THING, YOU ARE JUST USING A LOWER FREQUENCY OF LIGHT!

Personally the first person in here that talks (or anywhere on NS) to me about Masers better be ready for an invisible light-show, cause this thing is not a threat and can be easily blocked when compared to its cousins. Its not going to do anything against even basic shields at very high levels, and can simply be canceled.

Lasers.

Alright, kudos to you if you use these. Military applications...decent, but this is probably decent up to 2050. Not FT, these things outright suck. What's funny is that almost every FT nation has energy based weapons with these or plasma weapons. The funny thing is...its a dumb idea.

Lasers are about 2% efficent in the modern world. Those laser pointers you see are functioning at just milli-watts. Even very powerful ones are functioning not far above that. Considering the average 60W light bulb puts off about 12,000x more watts then a laser. Essentially this means that any laser weapon is horribly inefficent when you compare how much energy it takes to use. A good weapon...if only it was still good that far into the future.

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

Alright, the last mini-topic I will deal with for now is this:

CHARGING WEAPONS WOULD DESTROY YOUR SYSTEMS!

When you see the Death Star powering up you are looking at the biggest Godmod in Star Wars. It has no way to load up that energy and no offical way on how it gets it, or how it even uses it. Though somehow this thing can blow up a planet. The Death Star would work maybe one time...if that in reality. The sheer amount of cooling and heat sink systems. As far as I am concerned the sheer amount of heat generated from even extremely efficent systems (which is clearly not possible because of the construction and weaponry) would have a energy released in Joules on a scale of 1 to 600th power.

A centillion of joules. Even on the scale at which the Death Star was, this is the total amount to make every centimeter of the Death Star over 100 million degrees and that's just on the second in which it is firing, no build up or anything. The Death Star would melt and then explode if it ever tried to use this weapon!

Keep this in mind when X ship has their lasers charge up to 66 pentrillion joules. By all reality...no matter what you come up with to protect your ships, they are outside physics and reality too far to even be considered fair and at such temperatures would be plasma themselves, just speeding the destruction of the user.

Make sure your ships can take the heat before you do this stuff. Heat Dissappation only works soo well and when you deal with such high temperatures and their natural properties, you are seriously screwed.


Also.. that and the Death Star cannot possibly work...even in your dreams.

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

I call into question your credability as a reliable authority on any of the things you have discussed here in light of the mecha thread, in which you seemed to claim mecha as feasible military technology.

Meh.

Joranhor;11675260']I call into question your credability as a reliable authority on any of the things you have discussed here in light of the mecha thread, in which you seemed to claim mecha as feasible military technology.

Seconded. Considering your general lack of ability to comprehend anything I say, I'm not even going to bother arguing here.

Joranhor;11675260']I call into question your credability as a reliable authority on any of the things you have discussed here in light of the mecha thread, in which you seemed to claim mecha as feasible military technology.


It was proven though. For logistics of my world it works surprisingly well. They are not combative. Logistics.

This is different and do the math yourself, if you know anything about energy weapons, you will see the huge amount of heat released for these 'charged' weapons.

Eraclea;11675226']It's good ole' Eraclea here.

If you have an FT nation, have you ever actually considered what weapons do what and how? Namely this whole Laser/Phaser/Maser and even tractor beam or any other energy-based system works?

To first build a basic model for my nation, I wanted a strong physics backed reality in which to be able to build upon. The more and more I looked into this, the more every FT NS nation seems to be utterly godmodding.

The most critical arguement is towards Star Wars fans, now the fan-made site using non-Lucas backed numbers is about as well written as a three year old's ideas on physics. Correction...a bug's ideas on physics.

I've never seen a larger pile of fake information (too blatently wrong to even begin to consider mistakes)! SD.net deserves a slap in the face for this. For I am blaming the collective stupidity of THEIR USERS on Nationstates.

If you dissect the information, almost everything is wrong. Though let's start with laser weaponry (since this is the focus of this topic at the moment).

First thing: Plasma weapons.

If you use these things you are SERIOUSLY in need of a reality check. Plasma does not last long. If you are using it on a planet or even in space, you have less then .000001 seconds to hit that target (1 micro-second) to even have a chance of doing any damage realistically with even weak shields.

Shields will make all your plasma weapons absolutely WORTHLESS. The shield does not need to asborb any heat, as long as it acts as a solid barrier (or even less) and is capable of holding the plasma back for .0001 seconds that plasma attack (even very large weapons) will simply fizzle out. You'd need mass that would be sufficent to keep the nuclear fusion from gravity working on its OWN to even consider the power displayed on many capital ships. Which means they are too hot, too massive and probably just too dense to even fire, let alone reach the speed needed to do damage in the fraction of a second to work.

Not happening on the FT level.

Masers.

Have you even began to look at what source of energy you are using for this 'weapon'. Also, you should be slapped and bludgeoned to death for considering that at relative outputs Masers are better weapons then Lasers. ITS THE SAME THING, YOU ARE JUST USING A LOWER FREQUENCY OF LIGHT!

Personally the first person in here that talks (or anywhere on NS) to me about Masers better be ready for an invisible light-show, cause this thing is not a threat and can be easily blocked when compared to its cousins. Its not going to do anything against even basic shields at very high levels, and can simply be canceled.

Lasers.

Alright, kudos to you if you use these. Military applications...decent, but this is probably decent up to 2050. Not FT, these things outright suck. What's funny is that almost every FT nation has energy based weapons with these or plasma weapons. The funny thing is...its a dumb idea.

Lasers are about 2% efficent in the modern world. Those laser pointers you see are functioning at just milli-watts. Even very powerful ones are functioning not far above that. Considering the average 60W light bulb puts off about 12,000x more watts then a laser. Essentially this means that any laser weapon is horribly inefficent when you compare how much energy it takes to use. A good weapon...if only it was still good that far into the future.

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

Alright, the last mini-topic I will deal with for now is this:

CHARGING WEAPONS WOULD DESTROY YOUR SYSTEMS!

When you see the Death Star powering up you are looking at the biggest Godmod in Star Wars. It has no way to load up that energy and no offical way on how it gets it, or how it even uses it. Though somehow this thing can blow up a planet. The Death Star would work maybe one time...if that in reality. The sheer amount of cooling and heat sink systems. As far as I am concerned the sheer amount of heat generated from even extremely efficent systems (which is clearly not possible because of the construction and weaponry) would have a energy released in Joules on a scale of 1 to 600th power.

A centillion of joules. Even on the scale at which the Death Star was, this is the total amount to make every centimeter of the Death Star over 100 million degrees and that's just on the second in which it is firing, no build up or anything. The Death Star would melt and then explode if it ever tried to use this weapon!

Keep this in mind when X ship has their lasers charge up to 66 pentrillion joules. By all reality...no matter what you come up with to protect your ships, they are outside physics and reality too far to even be considered fair and at such temperatures would be plasma themselves, just speeding the destruction of the user.

Make sure your ships can take the heat before you do this stuff. Heat Dissappation only works soo well and when you deal with such high temperatures and their natural properties, you are seriously screwed.


Also.. that and the Death Star cannot possibly work...even in your dreams.

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



I dont think you even know what youre blabbering about . No one will really take this seriously .

[ooc: Poor didums doesn't like our weapons.

We don't like your mecha.

I think we are even!

A Note from the Friendly Singing Lady, Anisarian]

Answer: KE weapons kick butt.

Answer2: You wanted strong physics to base your nation on, so you used mecha. Way to establish your credibility in the field of realism.

Every Conan-based FT Nation Godmods energy.

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/6199/schwarzeneggerconansw8.jpg
Lies. What do you think I've my muscles for?

Eraclea;11675338']It was proven though. For logistics of my world it works surprisingly well. They are not combative. Logistics.

This is different and do the math yourself, if you know anything about energy weapons, you will see the huge amount of heat released for these 'charged' weapons.

No, what was proven was that you could not READ what anyone else was saying. We more than adequately proved Mecha to be stupid wastes of time but you would not have it. So again, I question your ability to act as any sort of authority on energy based weapons knowing your aforementioned habits from the mecha thread.

Joranhor;11675589']No, what was proven was that you could not READ what anyone else was saying. We more than adequately proved Mecha to be stupid wastes of time but you would not have it. So again, I question your ability to act as any sort of authority on energy based weapons knowing your aforementioned habits from the mecha thread.

Why you starting this again? You don't even understand what they look like, how they function or even the purpose of them. If you took a look to see that these are not combat intended mechs, you'll realize they hold more in common with space suits then a standard 'mech' as you think of it. Since someone well-versed in it came along and filled in the true and proper (and to scale details). Sorry, but your arguements were not consistant and it took too long to even get a proper answer that it was a waste of time.

No more hijacking the thread, if you have something to say about energy-weapons, then say it. Or just keep quiet and let the people who have college educations in this field speak about it.

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

Now any serious people willing to expand on this? How can these ships possibly work in FT when opposed by so much proof against the very nature of their ill-concieved technology.

Anyone? Anyone at all?

Here's a way to end all arguements based around technologies.

The Orks from WH40K made it simple: if they believe it works, it will.

Although I do not do FT, I have grappled with its concepts on numerous occasions, personally I feel you are looking too far into it, this is after all a game, in which peoples fantasies and dreams are brought manifest, if someone wants to use a deathstar with two super lazers for dual planet destruction, then some one will, purely because this is the perfect game and opportunity to test these things out, once you start breaking down the nitty gritty technologies that make things work, it stops being a game and becomes a university lecture..

However, you have the right to put forward your points, but FT will always have its super conducting plasma mazer cannons, and light emitting diode batteries, that for one thing will not change :)

Just voicing my opinion on the matter, I shall take my leave now :p

Although I do not do FT, I have grappled with its concepts on numerous occasions, personally I feel you are looking too far into it, this is after all a game, in which peoples fantasies and dreams are brought manifest, if someone wants to use a deathstar with two super lazers for dual planet destruction, then some one will, purely because this is the perfect game and opportunity to test these things out, once you start breaking down the nitty gritty technologies that make things work, it stops being a game and becomes a university lecture..

However, you have the right to put forward your points, but FT will always have its super conducting plasma mazer cannons, and light emitting diode batteries, that for one thing will not change :)

Just voicing my opinion on the matter, I shall take my leave now :p

YAY! Someone with an IQ level ABOVE 120!!

Ummm...

Isn't this science fiction?

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/6199/schwarzeneggerconansw8.jpg
Lies. What do you think I've my muscles for?

I didn't understand your reply at first until I read his line.

You gain 100,000 XP for intelligence and charisma!

Ummm...

Isn't this science fiction?

True. Though I want to enlighten everyone that their weapons are just so horriblely impossible that if they are going to consider being realistic, it will be hypocritical.

In all reality, why transporters that 'phase' people, when RL systems are being created and are being proven against that. Its just so nerve racking to hear so many people wanking to these techs and saying that one tech is legal and another isn't when they are all equally impossible.

What if it's as a plot device?

What if it's as a plot device?

I know where this is going! XD

Perhaps some people's weapons work differently than yours.

As much as you may wish it, not all of us do hard FT, and if you don't like it, you're free to go RP with someone who does. Don't tell the rest of us how to do our thing.

*looks around paranoid*

"You mean...*gasp*...*sniff*...you mean, that my imagination...is a godmod!? Oh Christ! *wails* Oh God! Oh...no....leave me alone....*cries*...where did all the faries and fun go?"

---

Its called role-play for a reason folks. Have fun and try not to get bogged down by so much detail. Jeez!

Eraclea;11677351']True. Though I want to enlighten everyone that their weapons are just so horriblely impossible that if they are going to consider being realistic, it will be hypocritical.

But then in turn you are contradicting yourself by discussing "in fact" on something that you have claimed to be blatantly hypocritical...

Perhaps some people's weapons work differently than yours.

As much as you may wish it, not all of us do hard FT, and if you don't like it, you're free to go RP with someone who does. Don't tell the rest of us how to do our thing.


The thing is... logically their weapons CAN'T work. Its making me very annoyed, because they tell me what my units can and cannot do (godmodding my forces) and they do not apply the same thermodynamics to their own ships.

The biggest one: Saying phaser/plasma weapons deal damage to ships. If you are going to use the technology, you should at least know how it works.

The best way to use plasma as aweapon is to create a device that gives the plasma the fuel it needs to keep up the nuclear reaction. then placesaid device in a ball of plasma contained by an EMF. since you are labering on about Hard scifi then you should know what that means.

and scince you cliam to want to be "Hard" Scifi then you should dump your FTL systems aswell.

But then in turn you are contradicting yourself by discussing "in fact" on something that you have claimed to be blatantly hypocritical...

My existing tech is not hypocritical. >.> Its not advanced, but its already proven to work....its just more common in my FT timeline then in MT times. Ion Engines are old, but they are the main propulsion in my world. You have your Light Propulsion, your Ionic and then the heavy duty solid boosters (cargo launches only...very dense matter etc)

Tech can never be too wanky.

Now, if it like hmm... screws up with another guy's RP then yah. But what you're saying would pretty much kills most of FT RP.

A bit of realism is fine (hell I try to be realistic) but... come on! There's a limit =/

Eraclea;11677443']The thing is... logically their weapons CAN'T work. Its making me very annoyed, because they tell me what my units can and cannot do (godmodding my forces) and they do not apply the same thermodynamics to their own ships.

This part right here. I think this is the point he's trying to really make, and I agree with him.

I've noticed that some people (not naming names) have a tendancy to complain about the technology that Eraclea and I use, due to the fact that they think that everyone should conform to using a single tech-type or set of tech-types (i.e. Star Wars tech, B5 tech, etc.) because they can't grasp the concept that there are people who use different tech than the ones stated above.

If I so choose to use mechs, mobile suits, and the like, then get used to it. If you don't want me to play with you, then politely ask me to leave. Don't go on some f-ing flame-trip just because you think mecha is stupid. It makes you seem like a douche to me, and makes me disrespect you.

[NS]Eraclea,

The thing with FUTURE TECH, is that it is all MADE UP in one form or another. The technology does not exist today which is why it is called Future Technoloty. I mean hello. Just cause the current mathematical equasions don't work for stuff such as the Death Stars main planet killing cannon doesn't mean that there will be a mathematical equasion that will make it work in say, 300 years or so.

And for reference, there are Lasers in todays current world, and they don't release that much heat. Just ask Russia and the US. Both have working prototypes of laser weaponry.

Eraclea;11675226']~snip~


Yes, yes, yes... we've heard it all before.

But you're missing the whole point. If all FT were based on real physics then Faster-than-light travel could never occur. Not Ever. Given the vast expanse of space and the immense distances even between stars considered close, you would have a very sllllooooowww, very boring, game on your hands.

The point behind FT is not to following the laws of physics in their strictest sense. That removes all the fun. At the same time, there is a line between good RP (Role-Play) and Godmodding, which it is true that many seem to stray across. However, claiming that the tech itself is godmodding is merely showing that you 'think' a little to much. Not a bad thing, by any means, but thinking too much in this sort of context is not a wise move.

I am also of the opinion that you just don't like Mr. Lucas' works, or anything that is related to them. That is of course your decision, but bear in mind one crucial fact, which I will state slowly and clearly so everyone realises something: IT. IS. FICTION. NONE. OF. IT. IS. REAL!

Following this arguement, we can draw a single conclusion. Due to the fact it is fiction, and thus not entirely bound by physics as we understand them, certain events can occur that couldn't possibly occur in real life. It's a game, man, try not to take it too seriously.

Bear in mind, I am totally for the use of various techs. I think it's good to allow others to use what they think is best for them. Every person is different. Final note: No-one is forcing you to RP with SW fans, you know. There are others out there. Like myself. I am not a huge user of it, and anything I do draw from it is small, such as the X-Wing fighter, but with some modifications to bring it more into line with my philosphy.

The best way to use plasma as aweapon is to create a device that gives the plasma the fuel it needs to keep up the nuclear reaction. then placesaid device in a ball of plasma contained by an EMF. since you are labering on about Hard scifi then you should know what that means.

and scince you cliam to want to be "Hard" Scifi then you should dump your FTL systems aswell.

I want to physically hurt you right now...

Plasma does NOT need a nuclear reaction to be created.

It is the 4th state of matter that exists with all electrons being stripped from the atom past the 7th electron 'orbit'. Its essentially excited electrons. Plasma on its own does not need to have heat to be 'plasma'. Though it is definately found more commonly in that form. You just need the electrons to be excited. Last I checked...this is done in lots of cool toys already.

Alrighty.. 'then placesaid device in a ball of plasma contained by an EMF.' If you are using a nuclear reaction to sustain the plasma, then the heat produced is easily over 10 Million F. The sheer amount of energy possessed by an electron is incredible already, but now you want to CONTAIN the control IN the plasma!? NOT POSSIBLE! You would need more energy then amount used to create the plasma to repel the electrons, which would create even more problems and would require two fields to control the plasma, release more plasma and protect the device from using it.

With the sheer temperatures and energy demands this means that controlling it is essentially impossible and you would have a horribly inefficent system, boarding on (or even into) a .000001% efficency rate. Meaning that for every Joule of energy put into it only .000001% would be harnessed as plasma for the short .001th of a second in which it could possibly exist. Meaning that you would be against all odds of even sustaining two fields (one of which has a barrier, doesn't expand, and is created while going through another EMP field and cannot be blocked by the electrons. This is impossible.

However even if you managed to do this you would be looking at 1E9 Joules to sustain the plasma for one second with the set up you described. (That's per Joule of plasma...the figure doesn't work on such a small scale..but it would work for very large amounts.

How would you over come RWM issues? MHD issues? The Lorentz force on this!? Would it have a magnetohydrodynamic drive to cool it? How would heat be disappated?

All these problems are against plasma weapons, it has come to my conclusion that they are not viable weapons, and you would have to stick with lasers if you want to do damage.

Also... from the canons seen, the emitted light is so weak that it would not deal any damage at all.

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/vader's%20tie%20fighter%20box%20art%203.jpg

The light emitted is visible light with a bandwidth of around 550 nm, which says little of the intensity, but is not a bandwidth that causes ionization that it should. This fatal flaw prevents it from being a threat on many targets, and it could be shrugged off or even cancelled from the range at which they are fired at.


Also: I don't use FTL. Though I am developing essentially ultra-ftl means. It would also be a proper and true systems of obeying every law of physics. Yet I would have speeds in excess of 2000000c. >.>

Right now, I'm trying to make my own tech relatively "realistic", but I have no problem with unrealistic tech, as long as it's used consistantly and not godmodded. My official position on FTL, phasers, and DeathStars is that the full FT scientists have found ways to make them work, even though Terran science says it's impossible.

Right now, I'm trying to make my own tech relatively "realistic", but I have no problem with unrealistic tech, as long as it's used consistantly and not godmodded. My official position on FTL, phasers, and DeathStars is that the full FT scientists have found ways to make them work, even though Terran science says it's impossible.

Normally I'm like Crocker and throw F-a-paloozas, but for once:


A!

Eraclea;11677710']


Also: I don't use FTL. Though I am developing essentially ultra-ftl means. It would also be a proper and true systems of obeying every law of physics. Yet I would have speeds in excess of 2000000c. >.>

Excuse me? How can this self-termed 'ultra-FTL' work if 'normal' FTL is a scientific impossibility!

Excuse me? How can this self-termed 'ultra-FTL' work if 'normal' FTL is a scientific impossibility!

I have to agree with him on this, Eraclea.

Eraclea look at this link and tell me what you think of this.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=370283

[NS]Eraclea,

The thing with FUTURE TECH, is that it is all MADE UP in one form or another. The technology does not exist today which is why it is called Future Technoloty. I mean hello. Just cause the current mathematical equasions don't work for stuff such as the Death Stars main planet killing cannon doesn't mean that there will be a mathematical equasion that will make it work in say, 300 years or so.

And for reference, there are Lasers in todays current world, and they don't release that much heat. Just ask Russia and the US. Both have working prototypes of laser weaponry.

Saying we don't have the intelligence to explain it today is a horrible way to try and escape it. Thermodynamics is fully understood for all relative means, and the Death Star would apply. The heat generated must go somewhere and be emitted somehow, but the heat released cannot be at infinite rate. Something that is over 1.5 E 27 joules of energy released on firing will have a HUGE amount of heat released. Since the laser at which the Death Star operates would be horriblely inefficent we are looking at over 50x more heat produced during charging and firing then the actual single burst. (Considering 2% efficency, but even at 10% it is not much better, try getting something to store that much energy alone is not possible, let alone controlling and releasing that heat.)


Yes, yes, yes... we've heard it all before.

But you're missing the whole point. If all FT were based on real physics then Faster-than-light travel could never occur. Not Ever. Given the vast expanse of space and the immense distances even between stars considered close, you would have a very sllllooooowww, very boring, game on your hands.

The point behind FT is not to following the laws of physics in their strictest sense. That removes all the fun. At the same time, there is a line between good RP (Role-Play) and Godmodding, which it is true that many seem to stray across. However, claiming that the tech itself is godmodding is merely showing that you 'think' a little to much. Not a bad thing, by any means, but thinking too much in this sort of context is not a wise move.

I am also of the opinion that you just don't like Mr. Lucas' works, or anything that is related to them. That is of course your decision, but bear in mind one crucial fact, which I will state slowly and clearly so everyone realises something: IT. IS. FICTION. NONE. OF. IT. IS. REAL!

Following this arguement, we can draw a single conclusion. Due to the fact it is fiction, and thus not entirely bound by physics as we understand them, certain events can occur that couldn't possibly occur in real life. It's a game, man, try not to take it too seriously.

Bear in mind, I am totally for the use of various techs. I think it's good to allow others to use what they think is best for them. Every person is different. Final note: No-one is forcing you to RP with SW fans, you know. There are others out there. Like myself. I am not a huge user of it, and anything I do draw from it is small, such as the X-Wing fighter, but with some modifications to bring it more into line with my philosphy.

Its good to hear from experienced players, hehe oldbies.

Though FTL means is still possible, without breaking any of the laws of physics or quantum mechanics. A hyperbolic universe would allow for that and would apply to everything and it would be fun to RP out to, but I know the moment I present this idea I'd be cursed and flamed off NS.

I can pull more out for Star Trek on how it is improbable to impossible, namely the energy systems themselves. Their miscalculation of anti-matter and the method of FTL travel, let alone the unusual fact of biological interaction on all the planets and their business.


Think about a hyperbolic universe...now that would explain a lot...wouldn't it!

Oldie? I take offence to that. When a 17 year old is being called old, what is the world coming to?

And anyway, someone needs to represent those who have seen this before. The forums are flooded with newcomers, and to be quite frank with you, it's annoying. Newcomers bring their sets of problems, and often end up fighting about the same worn issues that have been debated many times before. However, give it a few months, and a large number vanish. Only the dedicated remain.

Please note, I call you newcomer, not n00b, as n00b is an offensive title reserved only for those who I despise and wish were gone from this place.

And of course you'd be driven away. You know why? Because people don't come here to live out real physics. They come here for escapism. And nothing is better for escapism than a laser battle in deep space between mighty starships.

Eraclea look at this link and tell me what you think of this.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=370283

Ah. I do recall reading this. The only reason it would work so well is because of the geosynch. orbit to the planet. It would move with the Earth and therefore be straight, and wind would be the most potentionally damaging thing to it, aside of actual attack.

Do to size and the tightness (when constructed) of the actual construction it would be akin to putting a wire held tightly down by vices and shooting an air at it. Since its construction is extremely strong it would be very resistant to the weather as long as it is properly maintained. The worse thing would be severing of the wire which would allow it to crash to the ground, a very nasty result...and that would leave a large amount in an orbit that will quickly decay and burn up the rest in the atmosphere (if it was cut very high up).

Although it is nice you will need to remember that it will require hundreds of thousands of dollars in electricity per 'launch' not millions. It would be clean and very strong, but it has to be built up to take the weight and the ground operations would have to watch for storms during the ascent which could take hours.

Personally, I love it, though it would never work for Lotus, this thing would be destroyed by the competing heads of the world. Security would be a big deal, but since most FT nations are almost all 'united' people you could get away with it. Though just for some kicks, I'd RP a massive protest (from those loosing jobs to it, those who are opposed to this or that) and maybe some problems with it on first construction. Though it is a very good and cheap design IF you can build carbon nanotubes past a couple mm. However I see this as almost PMT feasible now. It would be close to 2090, but government pushing could change this to probably 2030 if they became desperate.

Oldie? I take offence to that. When a 17 year old is being called old, what is the world coming to?

And anyway, someone needs to represent those who have seen this before. The forums are flooded with newcomers, and to be quite frank with you, it's annoying. Newcomers bring their sets of problems, and often end up fighting about the same worn issues that have been debated many times before. However, give it a few months, and a large number vanish. Only the dedicated remain.

Please note, I call you newcomer, not n00b, as n00b is an offensive title reserved only for those who I despise and wish were gone from this place.

And of course you'd be driven away. You know why? Because people don't come here to live out real physics. They come here for escapism. And nothing is better for escapism than a laser battle in deep space between mighty starships.

Dude. It's Tanthan.

No one wants to play with a hyper FT nation. Tanthan also died out when I realized that my weapons, systems and very basis of my nation was not practical or possible. Tanthan was too advanced for me to play realistically when I have not RPed the MT -> PMT -> Low FT -> Mid FT -> Advanced FT range.

Excuse me? How can this self-termed 'ultra-FTL' work if 'normal' FTL is a scientific impossibility!

A hyperbolic universe.

This would allow for one point to connect to another point in a fraction of the distance when the two planar distances are seperated by huge amounts of distance. Light years or hundreds of thousands of light years.

The more detailed and known 'folds' of a hyperbolic universe the more the opportunity to exploit it.

However this idea is so abstract it is like the M-theory, just in massive form.

Eraclea;11675226']It's good ole' Eraclea here.

If you have an FT nation, have you ever actually considered what weapons do what and how? Namely this whole Laser/Phaser/Maser and even tractor beam or any other energy-based system works?
You betcha.
To first build a basic model for my nation, I wanted a strong physics backed reality in which to be able to build upon. The more and more I looked into this, the more every FT NS nation seems to be utterly godmodding.
You betcha. I have my own subcategory (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Wank#Honorary_C.27tan_Wank) on NS-Wiki's Wank article, I'm that much of a godmodder.
The most critical arguement is towards Star Wars fans, now the fan-made site using non-Lucas backed numbers is about as well written as a three year old's ideas on physics. Correction...a bug's ideas on physics.
Which one? Doctor Saxton's site? Mike Wong's? Whichever, I'm on fairly friendly terms with both. Neither are particularly poor writers, though Dr. Saxton isn't known for his humour - though he is a professional writer - yes, he's got several fictional books in print. All on the topic of Star Wars. If you must know how they produce energy, the explanation given there is the conversion of matter (or rather, hypermatter, which is bullshit on a whole new level) to energy. This is rocket science, and numerically possible, though there's no plausible mechanism for this to take place in the manner described in such a contained enviroment as a starship reactor.
I've never seen a larger pile of fake information (too blatently wrong to even begin to consider mistakes)!
Thanks. What, you think anyone's under the illusion that the information is real, and that there's real jedi out there?
SD.net deserves a slap in the face for this. For I am blaming the collective stupidity of THEIR USERS on Nationstates. That's odd. SDN predates NS. You sure it's not the other way around? In any case, you are welcome to go over there and refute. Seriously.
If you dissect the information, almost everything is wrong. Though let's start with laser weaponry (since this is the focus of this topic at the moment).
Okayy....
First thing: Plasma weapons.
These aren't laser weapons.
If you use these things you are SERIOUSLY in need of a reality check. Plasma does not last long. If you are using it on a planet or even in space, you have less then .000001 seconds to hit that target (1 micro-second) to even have a chance of doing any damage realistically with even weak shields.
You're confusing me! I thought almost everything on SDN was wrong? (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/PlasmaWeapons.html) P.S. Energy shields don't exist, either. They're in fact, at least as silly as plasma weapons.
Shields will make all your plasma weapons absolutely WORTHLESS.
Good thing they don't exist.
The shield does not need to asborb any heat,
Says you.
as long as it acts as a solid barrier (or even less) and is capable of holding the plasma back for .0001 seconds that plasma attack (even very large weapons) will simply fizzle out. You'd need mass that would be sufficent to keep the nuclear fusion from gravity working on its OWN to even consider the power displayed on many capital ships. Which means they are too hot, too massive and probably just too dense to even fire, let alone reach the speed needed to do damage in the fraction of a second to work.
And?
Not happening on the FT level.
Hunuh? you have a 'FT level' - that's odd. I thought 'FT' was just 'everything sciency that can't be done now.'
Masers.
Oooh. Shoot.
Have you even began to look at what source of energy you are using for this 'weapon'.
Yes.
Also, you should be slapped and bludgeoned to death for considering that at relative outputs Masers are better weapons then Lasers. ITS THE SAME THING, YOU ARE JUST USING A LOWER FREQUENCY OF LIGHT!
Different wavelengths of electromagnetic light have different refractive and penetrative qualities. This is why rainbows occur, and why a tin can is insufficient shielding for plutonium.
Personally the first person in here that talks (or anywhere on NS) to me about Masers better be ready for an invisible light-show,
... I'm pretty sue they are.
cause this thing is not a threat
You'd like to stand in front of one, then? Mind, most masers in reality are very small. But I'm sure you'd not like to stand in front of an active one mounted on a spacedy battleship with fission reactors.
and can be easily blocked when compared to its cousins. Its not going to do anything against even basic shields
Again, you seem to be under the impression that energy shields exist.
at very high levels, and can simply be canceled.

Lasers.

Alright, kudos to you if you use these. Military applications...decent, but this is probably decent up to 2050. Not FT, these things outright suck. What's funny is that almost every FT nation has energy based weapons with these or plasma weapons. The funny thing is...its a dumb idea.
You think they can't hurt stuff? Interesting...
Lasers are about 2% efficent in the modern world.
And space travel completely unprofitable. Your point?
Those laser pointers you see are functioning at just milli-watts.
Yers...
Even very powerful ones are functioning not far above that.
Yes. Of course, it helps that destructive laboratory lasers use oodles of joules per firing, but do it in a very short time, giving a deceptively low wattage.
Considering the average 60W light bulb puts off about 12,000x more watts then a laser.
And a whole hog less joules.
Essentially this means that any laser weapon is horribly inefficent
If you try to build it today... Yes.
when you compare how much energy it takes to use. A good weapon...if only it was still good that far into the future.
This isn't 'The Omega Man' or 'The Last Train' - FT generally means one should expect better technology.

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

Alright, the last mini-topic I will deal with for now is this:

CHARGING WEAPONS WOULD DESTROY YOUR SYSTEMS!

Oh-ho, this'll be fun.

When you see the Death Star powering up you are looking at the biggest Godmod in Star Wars.
Zuuur... Though I'd be tempted to say Obi-Wan's trick of surviving being apparently chopped in two would be a good candidate.
It has no way to load up that energy and no offical way on how it gets it,
Again, there actually is. Sure, it's bullshit, but it's there. Matter conversion. One fuckton times a oodle squared of matter conversion.
or how it even uses it.
Raygun go bang.
Though somehow this thing can blow up a planet.
Indeed...
The Death Star would work maybe one time...if that in reality. The sheer amount of cooling and heat sink systems.
Ever wonder why it's so big? Oh, and as a matter of fact, Dr. Saxton did a good take on that too. The heatsinks for such appalling energy supposedly emit neutrinos.
As far as I am concerned the sheer amount of heat generated from even extremely efficent systems (which is clearly not possible
Extremely efficient is impossible? Kupluh?
because of the construction and weaponry) would have a energy released in Joules on a scale of 1 to 600th power.If you're going to try and use maths, show your working.
A centillion of joules. Even on the scale at which the Death Star was, this is the total amount to make every centimeter of the Death Star over 100 million degrees
Show working. Didn't they teach you this in school?
and that's just on the second in which it is firing, no build up or anything. The Death Star would melt and then explode if it ever tried to use this weapon!
Mmm. That depends on the conductivity, efficiency, heat sink capacity, and a number of other things you know nothing of.
Keep this in mind when X ship has their lasers charge up to 66 pentrillion joules. By all reality...no matter what you come up with to protect your ships, they are outside physics
But energy shields aren't...
and reality too far to even be considered fair and at such temperatures would be plasma themselves, just speeding the destruction of the user.
Again, do show workings...
Make sure your ships can take the heat before you do this stuff. Heat Dissappation only works soo well
Where, in 'the future,' 'soo well' happens to mean 'arbitrarily well' see your problem?
and when you deal with such high temperatures and their natural properties, you are seriously screwed.
Says you.
Also.. that and the Death Star cannot possibly work...even in your dreams.
My dreams allow lots of stuff...

By the way, what is a Conan based FT nation? The only conan-in-the-future type thing I can think of would be 40K, whose Emperor looks suspisiously like Arnold's Conan, and was born in 8000 BC in the near-East... Is that who you mean by Conan?

That said, I'm now considering a Conan based puppet. I've been meaning to read REH's books ever since I heard of his refutation of Lovecraft's claims about Mussolini in light of Fascist Atrocities in Ethiopia. A sterling man, Mister Howard, and his unfortunate death was a tragedy for fantasy literature... Anyway, I'll get onto your other posts in the morning.

Eraclea;11677847']Ah. I do recall reading this. The only reason it would work so well is because of the geosynch. orbit to the planet. It would move with the Earth and therefore be straight, and wind would be the most potentionally damaging thing to it, aside of actual attack.

Do to size and the tightness (when constructed) of the actual construction it would be akin to putting a wire held tightly down by vices and shooting an air at it. Since its construction is extremely strong it would be very resistant to the weather as long as it is properly maintained. The worse thing would be severing of the wire which would allow it to crash to the ground, a very nasty result...and that would leave a large amount in an orbit that will quickly decay and burn up the rest in the atmosphere (if it was cut very high up).

Although it is nice you will need to remember that it will require hundreds of thousands of dollars in electricity per 'launch' not millions. It would be clean and very strong, but it has to be built up to take the weight and the ground operations would have to watch for storms during the ascent which could take hours.

Personally, I love it, though it would never work for Lotus, this thing would be destroyed by the competing heads of the world. Security would be a big deal, but since most FT nations are almost all 'united' people you could get away with it. Though just for some kicks, I'd RP a massive protest (from those loosing jobs to it, those who are opposed to this or that) and maybe some problems with it on first construction. Though it is a very good and cheap design IF you can build carbon nanotubes past a couple mm. However I see this as almost PMT feasible now. It would be close to 2090, but government pushing could change this to probably 2030 if they became desperate.


I have had this technology posted on Nationstates for a very long time,and as you can see it is based in the RL. My store front sells it, in fact ... I have already built one that is located in Kormanthor that I offer the use of to Modern Tech nations for a fee. But for some reason it seems very few are interested. Why is this? It is a mystery to me. I put alot of my time and effort into researching this technology. But I have recieved very little return on it. Maybe I am too business minded but I really don't like doing that much research to provide the NS Community with RL possibilities when they don't fly. So I now try to base my FT Products in some way to Sci Fi technology.

-snip-

Your no fun. I used SD.net's information for proving against their own arguements...go over there and just take a gander at the energy outputs. :D

Also about conan, your right, it should be canon/canonical. I made a typo.

'All Canonical FT Nations Godmod Energy'

Would have been a better choice, but its hindsight now sadly.

Eraclea;11676975']Why you starting this again? You don't even understand what they look like, how they function or even the purpose of them. If you took a look to see that these are not combat intended mechs, you'll realize they hold more in common with space suits then a standard 'mech' as you think of it. Since someone well-versed in it came along and filled in the true and proper (and to scale details). Sorry, but your arguements were not consistant and it took too long to even get a proper answer that it was a waste of time.

I understand perfectly; that mecha are poor fucking weapons platforms compared to specialized designs. Not once could you ever possibly refute this against anyone. Instead you went off on tangents and effectively said nothing despite the high number of posts you had in that thread. The only thing inconsistent were your responses to our answers, which was pretty much just misinterpriting what we were saying and drawing false conclusions.

No more hijacking the thread, if you have something to say about energy-weapons, then say it. Or just keep quiet and let the people who have college educations in this field speak about it.

It's not hijacking. It's me calling into questiony our ability to act as any kind of reliable authority on the subject in which this thread addresses. Until you have sufficiently proven that you know what in God's name you're talking about with this 'college degree' of yours (retail merchandising or liesure studies I bet), then my challenge stands.


Now any serious people willing to expand on this? How can these ships possibly work in FT when opposed by so much proof against the very nature of their ill-concieved technology.

Anyone? Anyone at all?

Because it's fiction is the simplist answer.

I have had this technology posted on Nationstates for a very long time,and as you can see it is based in the RL. My store front sells it, in fact ... I have already built one that is located in Kormanthor that I offer the use of to Modern Tech nations for a fee. But for some reason it seems very few are interested. Why is this? It is a mystery to me. I put alot of my time and effort into researching this technology. But I have recieved very little return on it. Maybe I am too business minded but I really don't like doing that much research to provide the NS Community with RL possibilities when they don't fly. So I now try to base my FT Products in some way to Sci Fi technology.

It seems to me that so many people are afraid of reality and limits here. It always has in fact. People rather stick with more expensive, bulky, wasteful and short-lived systems rather then invest in next-gen technology.

Good examples are:

Metal Storm Weaponry (More commonly seen is the glorified Rail Cannon!)
Dominator UAV's (Generally avoided for the 'zomg airforce' size)
Stealth Submarines (Generally avoided for nuclear submarines that are not as versatile or advanced in stealth)


I also find a stunning lack of medical, logistical and communication technology in PMT (even in many MT) nations that seem to be using 40 year old technology at the some points. Everyone seems to push for USA technology, China's technology or Russia's technology. It seems to be just the association of the world power's current tech is suitable for the next 30 years almost!

Sadly this seems to be from a lack of insight, a lack of understanding, or possible fear of flaming for it. Its just sad when a nation has F-22's and nuclear submarines in 2040-50 and still things they are dominating. Most PMT nations based off MT tech planned to enter or just entering service is infact very out of date. We are essentially talking a 30-40 year wait on new technology, before entering service...but most just don't understand that.

Its like telling them cold-fusion exists and has been recorded and verified, and they don't believe you because the latest show on the military channel has not ran an episode on it.

I love you, C'Tan. You're such a jackass.

Joranhor;11677976']I understand perfectly; that mecha are poor fucking weapons platforms compared to specialized designs. Not once could you ever possibly refute this against anyone. Instead you went off on tangents and effectively said nothing despite the high number of posts you had in that thread. The only thing inconsistent were your responses to our answers, which was pretty much just misinterpriting what we were saying and drawing false conclusions.



It's not hijacking. It's me calling into questiony our ability to act as any kind of reliable authority on the subject in which this thread addresses. Until you have sufficiently proven that you know what in God's name you're talking about with this 'college degree' of yours (retail merchandising or liesure studies I bet), then my challenge stands.




Because it's fiction is the simplist answer.

1. This is not a Mech thread.
2. If you have a degree in mechanical design of bipedal machinery speak up, otherwise stay quiet and let someone with legitimate study say something to back it up or refute it. I have an expert, they may BE an expert, unless I see decent and actually proper information on it, my opinion and my belief will not change.
3. Fiction is not a reason to come up with a super wanky weapon and justify it with X.

Eraclea;11678006']1. This is not a Mech thread.

No but it could quickly devolve into one if your habits from that thread spill over into this one.

2. If you have a degree in mechanical design of bipedal machinery speak up, otherwise stay quiet and let someone with legitimate study say something to back it up or refute it. I have an expert, they may BE an expert, unless I see decent and actually proper information on it, my opinion and my belief will not change.

I don't have a degree in mechanical design, just as you don't have a degree in laser technology. I do though, have what is known as 'common sense' which tells me based on all I know of physics and design, that bipedal machinery is inefficient and a waste of money. Your 'expert' in mechanical design would have his credintials ripped away if he were to actually publish a report supporting the idea of mecha in the face of the flaws inherent with the design. Also I, Otagia, GMCA, and everyone else who postedin that thread far more than sufficiently proved you to be totally imcompetent in the field of design.

3. Fiction is not a reason to come up with a super wanky weapon and justify it with X.

... Yes it is.

Joranhor, if you want someone to talk to about the plausibility of mecha, come talk to me in a different thread, and I mean talk, not flame.

I am versed in the concept of mecha, and can explain the physics behind them and how they are capable of working.

Enough...your hijacking it.

Also I am getting my degree in Fiber Optic and Laser Technology, its part of my double major with Electronic Engineering. Watch what you say before you say it. Don't go off making assumptions when I am planning to get a doctorate in Laser Technology.

All I need now is to be hired by Trumpe and I am set for life. :P

Eraclea;11678064']Enough...your hijacking it.

What I am doing is perfectly legal under the NS rules. I can call into question your credability as an expert on laser technology.

Also I am getting my degree in Fiber Optic and Laser Technology, its part of my double major with Electronic Engineering. Watch what you say before you say it. Don't go off making assumptions when I am planning to get a doctorate in Laser Technology.

Guess what, I don't believe you. If you are truly getting (note the word, getting, as in pursuing and not currently having a degree in) a degree in laser technology as it pertains to what you're talking about here, then you would NOT have said some of the things you have said here today, and you would at least know enough about design not to make all the rediculous conclusions you did in the mech thread.

At least in my country, Electrical Engineering is a major whilst "Electronic Engineering" is not. "Fiber Optic and Laser Technology" is not a major field; the closest thing I can think of to it would be a degree in Physics with a specialization in Optics, probably dual-majoring with Electrical Engineering.

I think what you fail to realize that many forms of technology in space operatic settings are what are known as "conceits," basically artistic licenses taken with reality in order to make a story more engaging. Given that a lot of our users are the sort of [Star Wars crowd which would find spindly delta-v limited eggshells with 'real'-technology weapons rather dull, relying on pew-pew "lasers"/phasers/bosers/omg teh deat beems is a conceit they apply, consciously or not, to make things interesting for them.

Other users have, in the past, tried to enforce reality on the FT aspect of the forums here. It didn't work very well then and it probably won't work very well now. As it stands, the tenor of the opening post is vaguely baitish, but I'm assuming that wasn't your intent. I'd recommend you step back, relegate yourself to leading by example, and not try to force collegiate-level physics on people who are, for the most part, high school and younger.

At the moment, I'm two classes (Stability and Control, Aircraft Structures II) short of an aerospace engineering degree. I think I can probably do more of the math required for making "real" aeronautical and astronautical FT than you but you don't see me busting anyone's chops. Trust me--almost everything that way is utterly broken in more ways than I'd care to recount.

So let's all calm down and let this drop. The latter being more imperative than suggestive.

[edited note: Google search comes up with "Fiber Optic and Laser Technology" being a class for an Associate in Science Degree in Electronics and Computer Technology at Chabot College. It does not appear to have ABET accreditation.]

Joranhor;11678078']What I am doing is perfectly legal under the NS rules. I can call into question your credability as an expert on laser technology.



Guess what, I don't believe you. If you are truly getting (note the word, getting, as in pursuing and not currently having a degree in) a degree in laser technology as it pertains to what you're talking about here, then you would NOT have said some of the things you have said here today, and you would at least know enough about design not to make all the rediculous conclusions you did in the mech thread.

Umm.. I never said I had a degree.. I am still getting it. I said if there is an expert here on it, let them talk, otherwise no more Mech talk.



Scolopendra -

To be honest about the name, the program name comes from the Bronx's college on it. It was originally called Photonics. The program has since had the name changed because many people when randomly asked what it was... they thought it dealt with lightning for photography and the science of photography!

We can get our associates in it. My Electrical Engineering major is also a legitmate. Its kinda cool, since I don't have to take too many more classes to get both.

Its a whole program, not a single class... we wouldn't have enough time to cover it all.

My professor's website: http://www.lasertechonline.org

I am also a member of SPIE. >.> Let me just say though, the very basics of understanding lasers and how they work has already proven it most Sci-fi series wrong. (Though thanks to other SPIE members, I presented the idea to them and they guided me along, and its so funny, because this kind of chat is a hobby and had a pretty long winded conversation on the best sci-fi series of the 'main-stream ones' and it fell down to Star Trek up to 2010. Though also found lots of mistakes.....just as normal.

Hmmm, I never thought of that...but Energy weapons does need to be well refined. I mean it really is time to consider wherever or not to maintain using powerful Twin Buster Rifle type weapons,

Hmmm, I never thought of that...but Energy weapons does need to be well refined. I mean it really is time to consider wherever or not to maintain using powerful Twin Buster Rifle type weapons,

Twin Buster Rifles are not that powerful. Against an Imperial Star Destroyer, the Twin Buster Rifle would probably need to fire twice to even knock the shields out. Only after that will it be able to kill it with the final devastating third shot, which would then deplete the Twin Buster Rifle's energy pack, forcing the pilot to charge the pack and resort to using it's beam saber and vulcan guns.

One comment before I go back to the realm of ignoring the nonsense that spews out of your mouth, Eraclea.

On the topic of masers: Please stand in an industrial scale microwave set to high. THEN tell us that microwaves are harmless.

Hmmm, I never thought of that...but Energy weapons does need to be well refined. I mean it really is time to consider wherever or not to maintain using powerful Twin Buster Rifle type weapons,

The key problem is the heat issue, since these huge blasts of very intense energy come from the engine itself it must also be hard on the engine to spike in power on the scale of which most ships deliver the blasts. Its been noted that on larger ships, life support and all regular comforts take less then 1% of the total power of the engine output during combat conditions.

The only question is... Why!?

Once you start looking at the fuel supplies and wear and tear on engines it becomes very obvious that ship combat operations are sometimes measured in hours to hundreds of hours, while total food and life-support and otherwise peacetime conditions leads to decades even. The life of the ship is so drastically cut short that something with the entire system is at fault.

Gundam laser weapons draw charges for their guns (Mega Particles) from the reactor, but it will take 15 minutes from a decent size ship to produce enough for a single shot! It is far easier to store energy then it is to produce it under extreme situations.

The power output is just too intense for Star Trek and Star Wars engines. It is essentially revving up the engine on a car and peeling out and doing crazy stunts, the strain is too much and causes a large amount of damage over time. If they moved away from using energy drawn from the engine (even charging them for hours to a super-intense burst is bad on the systems that have to deal with all the heat) to a cell or solid-state weapon, it would be far easier on the systems.

As we all know, everything in electronics has some resistance, and although this resistance decreases at high frequencies, it still gives off a lot of heat over time, this heat continues to build and makes it ever worse until it just burns up. (Like a 10 ohm ( 1/8 Amp rated) resistor burns up in a 10V / 1A circuit, the flame is noticable and pretty impressive!)

Its just the fact that the heat and efficentcy problems are just too great for me to ignore, I'd love to see a move back to missiles in space, and lasers being used for knocking out weak ships and other things with no shields. Its just not funny to see the Death Star shoot a giant beam of energy when a single bomb could has obliterated it all in the first place. That or capital ships shooting LASERS at each other. Given the technology, the lasers should not even be on the visible spectrum, the fact you see the bursts is clearly evident that the lasers are not functioning at all realistically.

To test this: Take a laser pointer, a shopping center grocery scanner...anything that is a true laser. Just turn it on. Do you see a beam in the air? If not you know that since it is not interacting with the air on a large level, why would it in Star Wars to the point of moving at the speed of bullets and are capable of being seen?

I just wish more sci-fi shows used their terms and showed what they did properly and at least some true to life. Pet peeve: Fights in space have sound in many sci-fi shows, in reality there is no medium for it to transfer across and it would be silent.

One comment before I go back to the realm of ignoring the nonsense that spews out of your mouth, Eraclea.

On the topic of masers: Please stand in an industrial scale microwave set to high. THEN tell us that microwaves are harmless.

Simplistic shielding works against this, its not too-far-fetched to say with a simple coating you can reflect the microwaves or even divert them.

Laser in Star Wars does not equal Laser in RL. I often have a beef with people who think so just because they have similar names.

We all know that lasers don't behave the way they do in Star Wars. For all we know, turbolasers are exotic matter/energy weapons that happen to have a fancy brand name to keep things simple so they could sell, but are something else entirely, or perhaps the original meaning of turbolaser is lost. A thousand generations of galactic civilization can do that to you.

Eraclea;11678236']Umm.. I never said I had a degree.. I am still getting it. I said if there is an expert here on it, let them talk, otherwise no more Mech talk.

You have yet to EXPLICITLY state that you had a degree in the field in which you critique, however, you continually try to be the authority in this debate about laz0rs and other such things, suggesting that you have some sort of qualifications to even speak in the manner in which you have thus far. Also the Mech question still stands: knowing your inability to comprehend logic or type out a single cogent thought, can you be considered a legitimate expert on this subject, or an authority in any degree at all?

Laser in Star Wars does not equal Laser in RL. I often have a beef with people who think so just because they have similar names.

We all know that lasers don't behave the way they do in Star Wars. For all we know, turbolasers are exotic matter/energy weapons that happen to have a fancy brand name to keep things simple so they could sell, but are something else entirely, or perhaps the original meaning of turbolaser is lost. A thousand generations of galactic civilization can do that to you.

That still does not change the meaning of what it is or what obstacles it has to overcome to work. It is still LIGHT from L in LASER. Laser is an acronym and that part is inescapable. Turbo just adds on 'Speed', its a fast laser, but the thing is...it is not fast, it is not realistic and it definately is not light they are shooting at you, if people can dodge and roll out of a laser fire while being shot at...that just tells you how wrong it is. The moment you put those lasers against real lasers from real life or other canons, we start to see a breakdown on just what is considered maser/phaser/laser in sci-fi. It is this that is the problem, the heat output of these systems far exceeds realistic effects displayed in books, movies, series or whatever media they show it off in.

One of my favorites is during the ceremony to become a Jedi, the hair is cut with a LIGHT SABER, yet no flesh is burned, the hair does not suddenly burst into flame, and the hair does not melt. This is a contradiction on so many levels. You have confined plasma in a field (which already stretches that possibility based on the offical 'workings') that emits little to no heat until the field is pierced, note the air can do this...while moving...but not running or whatever (another impossibility). The field cannot be broken by another light saber, but anything else it can? This just does not add up with the way the universe and all of nature is.

Joranhor;11678559']You have yet to EXPLICITLY state that you had a degree in the field in which you critique, however, you continually try to be the authority in this debate about laz0rs and other such things, suggesting that you have some sort of qualifications to even speak in the manner in which you have thus far. Also the Mech question still stands: knowing your inability to comprehend logic or type out a single cogent thought, can you be considered a legitimate expert on this subject, or an authority in any degree at all?

I said that if you have a degree in it for Mechs, speak up, otherwise shut up and stay that way. Cause I am not listening to someone who creates so much drama that you'd think they were 12 years old. I don't want to hear any of it from you.

You don't need a degree to know that simple electronics study says the out put of the laser for the calculations to prove against it.

...I think you're all missing the main point, that FT nations are NOT BASED 100% ON REALITY!!

IF THEY WERE, THEY WOULD BE MT NATIONS!!

and, just in case you don't realize this...


NATIONSTATES IS A GAME!!!

It isn't meant to be 100% accutate to the dot! It's meant to be a game where people get together online and have fun!

Plus, how do you know that none of the FT weapons are possible. Have you personally ever tried to build a death star? because if you have, i retract all my statements. Otherwise...


GET A LIFE. DONT JUST BASH OTHER PEOPLE

Indeed, there are flaws in every science fiction. Indeed, you can see that there are many holes in the physics of Star Wars, holes that by our current science means that it's impossible to build such things. But you know what?

It.

Doesn't.

Matter.

Star Wars technology is just a backdrop from which to tell a story. A story about a young man who is just beginning to notice that the universe has bigger plans than to simply keep him on a backwater desert planet in the middle of nowhere. One could easily adapt Luke Skywalker and his friends to any genre, even pure swords-and-sorcery fantasy (what Star Wars is, only in space).

In other words, the technology used in our RPs, the spaceships and turbolasers and lasguns and everything else is not important. It never has been. It never will be. All that is important is the actual story you want to tell. Me, I tell the epic story of a Jedi royal family struggling against a resurgent Emperor Palpatine and his Galactic Empire and the wars and duels that comes with the territory. All the technology that I use, create, and unleash is just a part of the story that I tell. I don't care what turbolasers are, only that they kill my enemies. I don't care how badly mangled the physics of a lightsaber is, only that it cuts (almost) anything. Hell, I don't even care that mystical powers aren't real, only that my characters like to use them. In the end, I don't care how my equipment work, only that they do for the purpose of the RP.

That's the bottom line. That's the point of RPing in the first place. And that's why I don't give a rat's ass if you think my nation is one big godmod, because I sure as hell don't want to RP with someone who's unwilling to have fun and let others have their fun as well.

Eraclea;11678627']I said that if you have a degree in it for Mechs, speak up, otherwise shut up and stay that way. Cause I am not listening to someone who creates so much drama that you'd think they were 12 years old. I don't want to hear any of it from you.

You don't need a degree to know that simple electronics study says the out put of the laser for the calculations to prove against it.

Ok, this is where you totally discredit yourself: apparently to be able to critique anything one needs a degree to be able to talk. But the same does not hold true to you: you can critique lasers and laser technology without a degree because you claim that it is all "simple." Well what makes FT energy weapons simple? What makes the interactions between various wavelenths of light and different elements simple? Nothing. It's simple because you and only you claim it is.

Also, fuck off. That is my response to you telling me to shut up because I don't have a degree in mechanical design. I don't need a degree to tell you that specialized designs kick all-holy ass against mecha; the reasons were explicably stated by me and others in that thread in which you proved yourself wholey incompetent. Of course if it's true I need a degree to critique mecha, I guess I need a degree to breath, one to eat, one to drink, one to shit, and one to pee. Since apparently to be able to speak about something you need a degree in that something to be considered legitimate.

As far as my age and 'drama' goes: you cause any 'drama' inherent to your threads by refusing to listen to logic and refusing to draw valid conclusions based on logic. That is actually indicative of someone who is less than mature. How I'm twelve years old but able to think cogently, but you can't despite your apparent advanced age, is either an indication that you're very stupid, or the world is very fucked up.

Wow. A four-semester "expert" course on lasers. You do realize that an Associate's is broadly equivalent to technical (not engineering) training on any given matter? If you were to enlist in the USAF and worked with the lasers they have up at Wright-Pat as a technician you'd end up with an essentially equivalent skillset--technically capable, yes, but hardly the expert qualifications you suggest.

Meanwhile, as an aerospace engineer I do have course parity with most mechanical engineers. From my learning the mechanical usefulness of mecha is... shall we say... sorely limited (the square-cube law plays a big part in this). I don't believe that to be an issue for FT issues because it is, like anything else, a plot device. A conceit.

And let's try this again:

Let's all drop this, smile, and let it lie. Resorting to flaming isn't going to help anyone. Next person to say an unkind word is going to probably regret it.

Like CW said, the tech is irrelevant. It works, thats what matters. Unless I'm writing Tech Priest dialogue, I'm not going to care about the innermost secrets of a plasma reactor, the mechanism of a lasgun or how the Emperor gets so dirty in his golden throne. What matters is the story. The Tech is the props for telling said story. You can't figure out how Sci-fi like SW works because Lucas wasn't jotting down equations. The Death Star has a beam, because you'd have to see it working, its green, so the big explosion will be shiny. The explosion is generic, and so on, and so forth.

Such assinine arguments can only be applied to things which churn out indepth technical blueprints, drawing yet more away from what matters in roleplaying.

Story.

Wow. A four-semester "expert" course on lasers. You do realize that an Associate's is broadly equivalent to technical (not engineering) training on any given matter? If you were to enlist in the USAF and worked with the lasers they have up at Wright-Pat as a technician you'd end up with an essentially equivalent skillset--technically capable, yes, but hardly the expert qualifications you suggest.

Meanwhile, as an aerospace engineer I do have course parity with most mechanical engineers. From my learning the mechanical usefulness of mecha is... shall we say... sorely limited (the square-cube law plays a big part in this). I don't believe that to be an issue for FT issues because it is, like anything else, a plot device. A conceit.



[Albeit quietly, big up the aerospace engineering students. We are the best]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch;

Guys, come on. Drop it. It's a game. It doesn't have to be real. It doesn't have to follow rules or laws of physics. They all apply to real life, and alwasy will. But this is an online RPing forum. Chill out, relax, and enjoy telling a story, without resorting to tech-wanking and "That can't work, it'll melt". If you don't agree, you aren't forced to post. Don't flame, bitch, moan, and fight over it. Just leave it well alone.

=
This part right here. I think this is the point he's trying to really make, and I agree with him.

I've noticed that some people (not naming names) have a tendancy to complain about the technology that Eraclea and I use, due to the fact that they think that everyone should conform to using a single tech-type or set of tech-types (i.e. Star Wars tech, B5 tech, etc.) because they can't grasp the concept that there are people who use different tech than the ones stated above.

If I so choose to use mechs, mobile suits, and the like, then get used to it. If you don't want me to play with you, then politely ask me to leave. Don't go on some f-ing flame-trip just because you think mecha is stupid. It makes you seem like a douche to me, and makes me disrespect you.=




Well, it seemed that Eratrea was telling everyone to conform to his. I'm fine if you use mobile suits, or whatever you want to use. Hey, Mobile Suits, Mecha, whatever, FT is supposed to be futuristic. Which should mean that the sky's the limit. However, people should conform to one tech-type FOR ANY ONE ROLEPLAY. It's like you can't succesfully cross Batman and X-Men for more than a guest appearance, but it doesn't make either any less awesome.


Yeah, I think I forgot what I was talking about...

[Albeit quietly, big up the aerospace engineering students. We are the best]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch;

Guys, come on. Drop it. It's a game. It doesn't have to be real. It doesn't have to follow rules or laws of physics. They all apply to real life, and alwasy will. But this is an online RPing forum. Chill out, relax, and enjoy telling a story, without resorting to tech-wanking and "That can't work, it'll melt". If you don't agree, you aren't forced to post. Don't flame, bitch, moan, and fight over it. Just leave it well alone.
I know for a fact all of my starships don't work. Hell, I admit to having an anti-entropic power generator (literally, for once) that has the unfortunate downside of making people go mad. I do this half on purpose because, well, I know what we're really capable of at the moment and I'm not really interested in doing the math to make up extrapolated stuff that 'works,' given how I do that day in and day out and would like a break from it now and again.

Still... I just had an interesting thought. Given that things probably don't burn in the IR spectrum like they're supposed to and still have all that waste energy (heat is energy, after all--just a low-exergy form of it) to get rid of, where does that depleted energy go? I usually just throw in a one-liner thing about throwing out the excess in the form of neutrinos because I've got the energy density for transmutation (and then some) before getting on with the plot. Hmmm... this makes me think about things and how to keep them sufficiently suspensive of disbelief.

Wow. A four-semester "expert" course on lasers. You do realize that an Associate's is broadly equivalent to technical (not engineering) training on any given matter? If you were to enlist in the USAF and worked with the lasers they have up at Wright-Pat as a technician you'd end up with an essentially equivalent skillset--technically capable, yes, but hardly the expert qualifications you suggest.

Meanwhile, as an aerospace engineer I do have course parity with most mechanical engineers. From my learning the mechanical usefulness of mecha is... shall we say... sorely limited (the square-cube law plays a big part in this). I don't believe that to be an issue for FT issues because it is, like anything else, a plot device. A conceit.

And let's try this again:

Let's all drop this, smile, and let it lie. Resorting to flaming isn't going to help anyone. Next person to say an unkind word is going to probably regret it.


Huh what expert qualifications? All I am pointing out is that basic study clearly rules out their reality, and of SW lasers even being lasers in every since of the word. This started out as a warning to people to be careful that their technology is not possible and certain people (whether they are posting in the forum or not (the latter is true here)) that they have to take the thing with a grain of salt and not dictate the effects of what weapon does what on my defenses, and then tries to throw in physics or whatever lame excuse to say how it works for them, but not for you.

All the SW blasters and lasers (yes it uses lasers as a term for TIEs) function like modern gas lasers. The fact they have to heat up the gas to even produce this burst to become plasma or whatever they chose to call it is far more power then what the actual blast would be.

I want to try and keep everything on a semi-realistic plane, but its pretty hard when some 'land-mine' has 16 GJ output and a blaster that fires gas in a plasma state is not capble of light-speed attacks as a laser (as it is claimed to fire as) and it does not disappate in the time required for plasma to disappate.

If people do this, it is godmodding, even using the Death Star or other ships without expressing how they work and enough information about them to provide a realistic output with enough information to finish the equation before dealing 'critical' damage to a target.

Before you play with some numbers you got to realize that wavelength, output, beam power and divergence are known before you attack someone with specific defenses. Just play smart when playing with lasers....and try to avoid Sci-fi double talk.

I know for a fact all of my starships don't work. Hell, I admit to having an anti-entropic power generator (literally, for once) that has the unfortunate downside of making people go mad. I do this half on purpose because, well, I know what we're really capable of at the moment and I'm not really interested in doing the math to make up extrapolated stuff that 'works,' given how I do that day in and day out and would like a break from it now and again.

Still... I just had an interesting thought. Given that things probably don't burn in the IR spectrum like they're supposed to and still have all that waste energy (heat is energy, after all--just a low-exergy form of it) to get rid of, where does that depleted energy go? I usually just throw in a one-liner thing about throwing out the excess in the form of neutrinos because I've got the energy density for transmutation (and then some) before getting on with the plot. Hmmm... this makes me think about things and how to keep them sufficiently suspensive of disbelief.


Ah, wibble.

Ya got me. I'm Aerospace Systems, not hardcore Aerospace. So I only have to be able to make a small box that deals with all those nasty little problems, and can just explain it away through the use of pixies and magic string.

In RL, unless you have to know it, people are content to know that something works, not how it works. The same applies here. I don't care how peoples technology works (apart from aircraft, I can get a little touchy at times. Mach7 indeed? Wave goodbye to your melting aircrew), just how they use it in RP.

Eraclea;11678829']If people do this, it is godmodding, even using the Death Star or other ships without expressing how they work and enough information about them to provide a realistic output with enough information to finish the equation before dealing 'critical' damage to a target.

Before you play with some numbers you got to realize that wavelength, output, beam power and divergence are known before you attack someone with specific defenses. Just play smart when playing with lasers....and try to avoid Sci-fi double talk.
Let's try this again, but this time using small words.

No, it is not godmoding. It is the result of people who don't understand technology beyond the standard science fiction memes using said technology to tell a story. A story. The story is the important thing.

If you personally want to go to the effort of using real science in everything you do, more power to you. Max Barry did not die and make you god of the forums, so do not presume to tell others what to do. My statements are to the effect that if I expended the effort, I could probably tear down everything you've done as well, thus making you by your belief in "reality == NS truth" a godmoder. I believe it would be for the best that this does not happen.

So let me try a final time in words of two syllables or less:

Cease telling other players how to play the game. Keeping on doing so will just look like flamebait, as the response to you telling others how to think is no longer a surprise and your demands are not welcome.

Well, in RL, Doctors use Lasers for Operations and the Military is trying to make a laser Weapon, so The idea of energy Weapons isn't that far from the truth. Now, Think of a Laser that Doctors use, now put ten thousand Times the Power into it, now you have a Superlaser that can Destroy Worlds.

and this Thread is Turning into a bit of a Flame bait, so watch out ok?

Indeed, there are flaws in every science fiction. Indeed, you can see that there are many holes in the physics of Star Wars, holes that by our current science means that it's impossible to build such things. But you know what?

It.

Doesn't.

Matter.

Star Wars technology is just a backdrop from which to tell a story. A story about a young man who is just beginning to notice that the universe has bigger plans than to simply keep him on a backwater desert planet in the middle of nowhere. One could easily adapt Luke Skywalker and his friends to any genre, even pure swords-and-sorcery fantasy (what Star Wars is, only in space).

In other words, the technology used in our RPs, the spaceships and turbolasers and lasguns and everything else is not important. It never has been. It never will be. All that is important is the actual story you want to tell. Me, I tell the epic story of a Jedi royal family struggling against a resurgent Emperor Palpatine and his Galactic Empire and the wars and duels that comes with the territory. All the technology that I use, create, and unleash is just a part of the story that I tell. I don't care what turbolasers are, only that they kill my enemies. I don't care how badly mangled the physics of a lightsaber is, only that it cuts (almost) anything. Hell, I don't even care that mystical powers aren't real, only that my characters like to use them. In the end, I don't care how my equipment work, only that they do for the purpose of the RP.

That's the bottom line. That's the point of RPing in the first place. And that's why I don't give a rat's ass if you think my nation is one big godmod, because I sure as hell don't want to RP with someone who's unwilling to have fun and let others have their fun as well.

this

Yup, I don't think the counterargument can be summarised any better than by one of the masters of the craft, CW.

Let's try this again, but this time using small words.

No, it is not godmoding. It is the result of people who don't understand technology beyond the standard science fiction memes using said technology to tell a story. A story. The story is the important thing.

If you personally want to go to the effort of using real science in everything you do, more power to you. Max Barry did not die and make you god of the forums, so do not presume to tell others what to do. My statements are to the effect that if I expended the effort, I could probably tear down everything you've done as well, thus making you by your belief in "reality == NS truth" a godmoder. I believe it would be for the best that this does not happen.

So let me try a final time in words of two syllables or less:

Cease telling other players how to play the game. Keeping on doing so will just look like flamebait, as the response to you telling others how to think is no longer a surprise and your demands are not welcome.

You took it out of context though, I was not trying to force anything on them. Its still part of what I've had happen before, people say they are using lasers to attack whatever, and going as far to dictate how much energy is released on them to what effect and what it does.

This gets me all the time, people dictate what their weapons do to me and my tech. That's godmodding, you are not allowed to simply dictate someones losses without coming across as a horrible RPer who has to control what other people can and can't do. Why shouldn't it be expanded to include the environment to?

This abuse comes across almost always as super weapons, Death Star or making a star go supernova. The Dr Device from Ender's Game. Weapons that do not inflict casualities directly seem to be permissable and when I claim to pick up the frequency of their laser and put up a reflective shield set to that frequency.

Though the main reason I am stating this whole thing, is to what 1010102 has done in the past. Just absolutely rampant abuse of tech and trying to force impossible things into PMT tech. (Clearly FT almost) Another mention is the infamous 'Black hole' weaponry that reduces the target to a singularity. There is nothing more annoying then having someone using black holes against your forces in space, claim to move them and use them to destroy your planet without any resistance.

If they can do this with their weapons, you can to (kinda the point, but just keep it relative...no one will want to play with you if you are using a superluminous gamma burst to wipe out everything. (Don't EVEN ask.)

I'm not saying all FT should be removed or whatever, but if you like realism, at least create something to make it at least seem plausible. You could go off and create new substances with your fancy particle replicator or particle supercollider.

Though probably the most relevant this rushed and poorly worded thing is about is: Original tech can have some leeway to, but if you want to be very realistic (to the point of hyper-realism) pick your punches and just realize that canons are just base standards for people who don't want or have the time to come up with their own universe to know just how many flaws exist with these famous canons.


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

If you are going to emit energy in the IR band it will be nice...but you could shoot off the energy far faster by using the gas to release UV or even X-ray beams at high temperatures through some direct heat-to-electricity system to shoot off the heat...but the signature would be noticable, but it would be practical and serve a good RP purpose (Like inter universeconflicts) Though whatever works for you.

/rant.
-------------------

If you have such an issue with SD.net, take it up with them on their forums rather than cowardly sniping from an entirely forum.

If you have such an issue with SD.net, take it up with them on their forums rather than cowardly sniping from an entirely forum.

I know. I hate Wong as well, but I don't fume about it here with more technobabble. Jeez...ever heard of "never let the facts get in the way of a good story?" I like some restraints, but good lord....

If you have such an issue with SD.net, take it up with them on their forums rather than cowardly sniping from an entirely forum.

no

Eraclea;11677952']Your no fun. I used SD.net's information for proving against their own arguements...go over there and just take a gander at the energy outputs. :D
I've been there for a very long time. I am in fact, a moderator 'over there.' I go by the handle of NecronLord. (Which is why I ended up as 'The C'tan' on NS, got the link from there)

As for its energy figures, you're aware that Wong's figures on SDN are not those you should be interested in, but those of actually pubished sources, such as the RotS ICS, yers? With its '40,000 tons of fuel transmuted to energy per second' hilarity.

And again, you haven't 'proved against their own arguments' you've made some statements about how plausible Warsie stuff is. No one is going to tell you that Star Wars technology is remotely feisable.
Also about conan, your right, it should be canon/canonical. I made a typo.

'All Canonical FT Nations Godmod Energy'
By 'canon' I can only presume you mean something based on TV/films. So, if I made a Firefly nation, it'd automatically be 'godmodding energy' would it?
Would have been a better choice, but its hindsight now sadly.

Sadly, yes. You've made your choice, and now it's a matter for mockery.

Eraclea;11678427']I'd love to see a move back to missiles in space,

Incidentally, this is the smartest thing you've said in this thread. I suggest you watch Battlestar Galactica.

Incidentally, this is the smartest thing you've said in this thread. I suggest you watch Battlestar Galactica.

For me at least, lasers, plasma, maser, what ever you use in FT basically revolves around a certain thing energy input, now to produce a laser like you said doesn't take a lot hell i have a laser pointer i got three years ago and the damned thing still works.

But to create a powerful laser you would need a massive out put of energy from your reactors i don't care what you use. If you need to drain that much power from your energy's out put you might as well have a paper cloth surrounding your ship because a mere fragment of wreckage could punch a hole threw the hull.

Lasers, Plasma, and maser are just too neat and clean for me plus its no fun. When someone can just fly by and burn an entire city with a single laser when you could stay in orbit and pound the living crap out of them.

This is why i am more of a PMT nation, i like FT shields and transport but i don't like the weapons so thats why most of my ships come with three things. Physical weapons, deflector shields (not to be confused with basic absorption shields) and a nice pretty set of guns on my ships that can produce a oval of explosions for dem' nasty little fighters and boarding party's. Using this method nobody had ever boarded one of my combat ships.

But then again this is Sci-Fi and it personnel preference,


Webster Definition
Main Entry: science fiction
Function: noun
fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component

And for those people who think understanding this is as hard as Chinese algebra ill break it down.

Science Fiction is--- weather actually possible or impossible is not the point. As long as its based on a more advance group or people/ person its Sci-Fi(Future Tech)


But i've said it before i dont care if they use energy based weapons it all a matter of personal preference.

Eraclea;11679088']
Though the main reason I am stating this whole thing, is to what 1010102 has done in the past. Just absolutely rampant abuse of tech and trying to force impossible things into PMT tech.


Taking 1010102 as a representative of all NS is not only illogical, it's stupid.

Eraclea;11675226']As far as I am concerned the sheer amount of heat generated from even extremely efficent systems (which is clearly not possible because of the construction and weaponry) would have a energy released in Joules on a scale of 1 to 600th power.

That's one, ace. 1x1x1x1...x1x1 is always going to be 1.

Eraclea;11676975']Why you starting this again? You don't even understand what they look like, how they function or even the purpose of them. If you took a look to see that these are not combat intended mechs, you'll realize they hold more in common with space suits then a standard 'mech' as you think of it.

There's no real difference, the human form simply isn't a useful basis for a piece of equipment; it's awkward, poorly balanced, overly prone to damage and difficult to do anything with. We have developed all our technology to do things we can't because of how crappy it is!

Eraclea;11676975']Now any serious people willing to expand on this? How can these ships possibly work in FT when opposed by so much proof against the very nature of their ill-concieved technology.

Because we can see them working, so they must work. They probably have the $name_of_scientist_field that allows them to dump heat into dimensional folds or re-radiate it from their hulls rapidly enough or such. Your arguments all hinge on the fact that something is seen to work, but it can't work because you don't want it to. Either ignore it or accept the fluff, sanctimonous whining and throwing out random malformed science won't cut it with anyone.

Eraclea;11678584']That still does not change the meaning of what it is or what obstacles it has to overcome to work. It is still LIGHT from L in LASER.

I assume you would also believe anything called a rifle must have a rifled barrel, a tank must be a hollow metal container designed to contain gas, liquid or powdered solids, and so on? Turbolasers don't act like lasers, therefore turbolasers are not lasers. Indeed, the canon material says they're a type of particle cannon.

Basing your entire argument on the name of a specific piece of technology is ridiculous. An Airbus A-380 is not a bus, does that mean it's unrealistic? A Blackhawk helicopter is not a bird, does that mean it's unrealistic? A Kawasaki Ninja motorcycle can't do any form of Ninjitsu, does that mean it's unrealistic?

Eraclea;11678427']If they moved away from using energy drawn from the engine (even charging them for hours to a super-intense burst is bad on the systems that have to deal with all the heat) to a cell or solid-state weapon, it would be far easier on the systems.

FT ships tend to use their power plant for mains power, not their engines. You know, those massive reactors that ships tote around to power their FTL drives and internal mains power systems?

Eraclea;11678427']Pet peeve: Fights in space have sound in many sci-fi shows, in reality there is no medium for it to transfer across and it would be silent.

Yeah, I'd just love to watch a movie with no sound in any of the combat scenes, that'd be great.

You are wrong, Eraclea. Leaving aside lasers, you are wrong on two other things.

First. Star Wars FTL is not actually going through the galaxy at faster-than-light speed. It's going AROUND the galaxy through 'hyperspace'. This means that it's perfectly possible to be in a different part of the galaxy before your origin point's light reaches there. Most other SF properties make use of the same shorcut.

Second. If it is not permissible for people to claim that it is impossible to understand their future technology in modern terms, than I demand you immediately provide technical readouts of everything you have in your nation. As well as your car, your bicycle, the fuel intake of your house, and your water-heating system.

Most people on NS are RPing politicians, royals, and average people. The scientists in the country would know what makes what work, just like now. There's no reason that someone needs to know every detail in order to run a country.

And for the record? Mechs suck. Especially bipedal designs. A hexapodal base might, emphasis might, work better in rough terrain than normal wheels. It'd still be difficult to maintain and repair, not to mention create, using modern technology.

But wait! You're saying that modern technology can be improved in order to allow mechs!

Yet it can't improve in order to allow particle beams and lasers? Your statement is foolish, and by extension you are too. I give it about the same credence that I give to the people who claim we faked the moonlandings. You have an agenda, and it's not one that either advances the cause of RP in NS, or makes you look particularly good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon <--- For the record. I have actual books lying around, but they're too bulky to pick up right now and at this point in the university season I'm sick of writing out bibliographies.

Eraclea;11675226']It's good ole' Eraclea here.

If you have an FT nation, have you ever actually considered what weapons do what and how? Namely this whole Laser/Phaser/Maser and even tractor beam or any other energy-based system works?

To first build a basic model for my nation, I wanted a strong physics backed reality in which to be able to build upon. The more and more I looked into this, the more every FT NS nation seems to be utterly godmodding.

The most critical arguement is towards Star Wars fans, now the fan-made site using non-Lucas backed numbers is about as well written as a three year old's ideas on physics. Correction...a bug's ideas on physics.

I've never seen a larger pile of fake information (too blatently wrong to even begin to consider mistakes)! SD.net deserves a slap in the face for this. For I am blaming the collective stupidity of THEIR USERS on Nationstates.

If you dissect the information, almost everything is wrong. Though let's start with laser weaponry (since this is the focus of this topic at the moment).

First thing: Plasma weapons.

If you use these things you are SERIOUSLY in need of a reality check. Plasma does not last long. If you are using it on a planet or even in space, you have less then .000001 seconds to hit that target (1 micro-second) to even have a chance of doing any damage realistically with even weak shields.

Shields will make all your plasma weapons absolutely WORTHLESS. The shield does not need to asborb any heat, as long as it acts as a solid barrier (or even less) and is capable of holding the plasma back for .0001 seconds that plasma attack (even very large weapons) will simply fizzle out. You'd need mass that would be sufficent to keep the nuclear fusion from gravity working on its OWN to even consider the power displayed on many capital ships. Which means they are too hot, too massive and probably just too dense to even fire, let alone reach the speed needed to do damage in the fraction of a second to work.

Not happening on the FT level.

Masers.

Have you even began to look at what source of energy you are using for this 'weapon'. Also, you should be slapped and bludgeoned to death for considering that at relative outputs Masers are better weapons then Lasers. ITS THE SAME THING, YOU ARE JUST USING A LOWER FREQUENCY OF LIGHT!

Personally the first person in here that talks (or anywhere on NS) to me about Masers better be ready for an invisible light-show, cause this thing is not a threat and can be easily blocked when compared to its cousins. Its not going to do anything against even basic shields at very high levels, and can simply be canceled.

Lasers.

Alright, kudos to you if you use these. Military applications...decent, but this is probably decent up to 2050. Not FT, these things outright suck. What's funny is that almost every FT nation has energy based weapons with these or plasma weapons. The funny thing is...its a dumb idea.

Lasers are about 2% efficent in the modern world. Those laser pointers you see are functioning at just milli-watts. Even very powerful ones are functioning not far above that. Considering the average 60W light bulb puts off about 12,000x more watts then a laser. Essentially this means that any laser weapon is horribly inefficent when you compare how much energy it takes to use. A good weapon...if only it was still good that far into the future.

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

Alright, the last mini-topic I will deal with for now is this:

CHARGING WEAPONS WOULD DESTROY YOUR SYSTEMS!

When you see the Death Star powering up you are looking at the biggest Godmod in Star Wars. It has no way to load up that energy and no offical way on how it gets it, or how it even uses it. Though somehow this thing can blow up a planet. The Death Star would work maybe one time...if that in reality. The sheer amount of cooling and heat sink systems. As far as I am concerned the sheer amount of heat generated from even extremely efficent systems (which is clearly not possible because of the construction and weaponry) would have a energy released in Joules on a scale of 1 to 600th power.

A centillion of joules. Even on the scale at which the Death Star was, this is the total amount to make every centimeter of the Death Star over 100 million degrees and that's just on the second in which it is firing, no build up or anything. The Death Star would melt and then explode if it ever tried to use this weapon!

Keep this in mind when X ship has their lasers charge up to 66 pentrillion joules. By all reality...no matter what you come up with to protect your ships, they are outside physics and reality too far to even be considered fair and at such temperatures would be plasma themselves, just speeding the destruction of the user.

Make sure your ships can take the heat before you do this stuff. Heat Dissappation only works soo well and when you deal with such high temperatures and their natural properties, you are seriously screwed.


Also.. that and the Death Star cannot possibly work...even in your dreams.

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


Now here is someone how fails to understand the concept of FT.

You are using our information today to base the designs of technologies five thousand or possibly longer in my case into the future. Come on.

For example, in 120BC, it was deemed impossible by their current understanding to fly or even glide in the earths atmosphere, yet we're doing it now.

Why? Because our understanding consistently evolves, who are you to say that these principles of modern science may not be changed in light of new information?

Honestly, You have absolutely no idea how naive you sound in being able to judge what may or may not work in the future. The Death Star for example. A big open moon, large energy generation, filled with conductors and vents, and all sorts of crazy sci-fi fields to keep the thing from melting can work. Why, because it's SCIENCE FICTION. And Free Form Roleplay, get it? FREE FORM ROLE PLAY = NO RULES

Future tech is not like the stat based wank filled, boring land grinds of modern tech, it's a a place where stories are told, where players can do pretty much whatever they want thanks to some crazy device they just wanked up for some fun.

Honestly, before you start moaning with facts in regard to fiction I suggest you get a grip.

For example, in 120BC, it was deemed impossible by their current understanding to fly or even glide in the earths atmosphere, yet we're doing it now.

Erm, they still had birds in 120BC, actually.

Why? Because our understanding consistently evolves, who are you to say that these principles of modern science may not be changed in light of new information?

Because the principles of modern science are now extremely well-founded and highly researched, as opposed to the past when they were barely understood at all. The strongest foundations of science are unlikely to be overturned, hence the requirements for some handwaving in far-FT. Don't in any way pretend it's anything but that.

You still have to be reasonable with which rules you break: the important point is suspension of disbelief. If you're being so ridiculous that the other player simply can't believe your technology, it's bad. If you're just waving aside a few things to make a better story, fine and good.

And Free Form Roleplay, get it? FREE FORM ROLE PLAY = NO RULES

Erm, no rules not agreed on by both players [or the board's moderation staff and admins], not no rules. Otherwise, I just conquered your nation with my telekinetic kittens firing MIND BULLETS, ahahahaha.

Future tech is not like the stat based wank filled, boring land grinds of modern tech, it's a a place where stories are told, where players can do pretty much whatever they want thanks to some crazy device they just wanked up for some fun.

Actually, future tech is equally full of stupidly wanked superweapons that abuse exotic scientific terms for Voyager cod-realism [such as applying quantum effects to entire spacecraft], massive numberwank, and huge exaggerations of the capabilities of nanotech. Both modern-tech, PMT and future are just as easy to wank in.

You do realise that a good portion of FT nations shun SW tech. I, for, based my nation's advanced tech on different applications of using the 'strong nuclear force' which binds nuclei together. Kendari and Otagia and plenty of others have custom tech.

Besides this is FUTURE tech, how do you know that our current view of physics will still apply several thousand years from now? I mean, a thousand years ago the sun was a God, and no one had the faintest idea about nuclear fusion. If you don't enjoy FT tech, or are unwilling to bend the rules a little bit, why don't you muck around in MT or PMT rather than annoy those of us who lack astrophysics degrees.

EDIT: By the way, Unified Sith, shut up, you're making us look bad. ._.

Erm, they still had birds in 120BC, actually.

By human means. Apologies if the intention wasn't blatant enough.



Because the principles of modern science are now extremely well-founded and highly researched, as opposed to the past when they were barely understood at all. The strongest foundations of science are unlikely to be overturned, hence the requirements for some handwaving in far-FT. Don't in any way pretend it's anything but that.

Yet it's still possible. Science is every evolving and something can change our current understanding. The ability to accept this is the fundamental basis for theoretical evolution. Don't in any way pretend it's anything but that.

You still have to be reasonable with which rules you break: the important point is suspension of disbelief. If you're being so ridiculous that the other player simply can't believe your technology, it's bad. If you're just waving aside a few things to make a better story, fine and good.

It's for the players to decide, but the principle of Freeform Roleplay stands. It's Freeform. Whether other players wish to play with you is another matter entirely.


Erm, no rules not agreed on by both players [or the board's moderation staff and admins], not no rules. Otherwise, I just conquered your nation with my telekinetic kittens firing MIND BULLETS, ahahahaha.

As far as I was aware, roleplay and story telling upon Nationstates was not moderated. The cordial attitudes towards players however in an OOC sense is.



Actually, future tech is equally full of stupidly wanked superweapons that abuse exotic scientific terms for Voyager cod-realism [such as applying quantum effects to entire spacecraft], massive numberwank, and huge exaggerations of the capabilities of nanotech. Both modern-tech, PMT and future are just as easy to wank in.

Yup, you're right there. But the wank tells a story.

You do realise that a good portion of FT nations shun SW tech. I, for, based my nation's advanced tech on different applications of using the 'strong nuclear force' which binds nuclei together. Kendari and Otagia and plenty of others have custom tech.

The amount of people who I roleplay with says otherwise.

Besides this is FUTURE tech, how do you know that our current view of physics will still apply several thousand years from now? I mean, a thousand years ago the sun was a God, and no one had the faintest idea about nuclear fusion. If you don't enjoy FT tech, or are unwilling to bend the rules a little bit, why don't you muck around in MT or PMT rather than annoy those of us who lack astrophysics degrees.

I agree, read it, compare it to the first paragraph, then listen to it again.

EDIT: By the way, Unified Sith, shut up, you're making us look bad. ._.

I would advise you yourself to "shut up". Ignoring wank just because it's not custom is hardly a justifiable reason? Future Tech is a fantasy, yours is one which involves your own technological devices, mine is through the use of Star Wars. Both are as equally wanky as each other. Who gave you the right to judge what is and what is not acceptable.

By human means. Apologies if the intention wasn't blatant enough.

Well, the stories of Icarus and Daedalus say you're wrong. The Ancient Greeks clearly thought it entirely possible as long as you didn't fly too close to the sun.

Yet it's still possible. Science is every evolving and something can change our current understanding. The ability to accept this is the fundamental basis for theoretical evolution. Don't in any way pretend it's anything but that.

Erm, the likelihood of overturning any of the fundamental scientific principles now is slim to none. Things like conservation of energy are assumed by all of science, and if conservation of evergy is wrong, so is all of the rest of science and every experiment and test ever performed. That's kinda...Unlikely.

As far as I was aware, roleplay and story telling upon Nationstates was not moderated.

You'd be wrong. Excessive content in RPs will get you kickage.

Well, the stories of Icarus and Daedalus say you're wrong. The Ancient Greeks clearly thought it entirely possible as long as you didn't fly too close to the sun.

Yet, he failed. No actual event is recorded, I would still say the scientific consensus at the time would be one of improbability. But that's opinion, I can't really back it up.



Erm, the likelihood of overturning any of the fundamental scientific principles now is slim to none. Things like conservation of energy are assumed by all of science, and if conservation of energy is wrong, so is all of the rest of science and every experiment and test ever performed. That's kinda...Unlikely.

Unlikely, but possible.


You'd be wrong. Excessive content in RPs will get you kickage.

Even in regard to a technological design? After all we're debating wank here. I see the event of someone inventing a wank filled Maser worthy of being banned rather remote..... but possible ;)

Yet, he failed.

No, Daedalus didn't fail, only Icarus did. In fact, neither of them did it at all, because it was a legend, but they certainly believed it possible.

No actual event is recorded, I would still say the scientific consensus at the time would be one of improbability. But that's opinion, I can't really back it up.

Unlikely. Birds could fly, tree seeds could fly, and men could already build things that could fly on their own as well. It's highly unlikely that they didn't imagine one day a man could build a thing that flew. The first report of a man flying is from 19AD, after all.

Unlikely, but possible.

It's also possible that in one second you'll turn into a three-headed ice-griffon-batfrog. It's possible that I'm able to destroy planets by waving may hand and just haven't found the right way to do it yet. 'Possible' and 'even remotely plausible' are a long way apart.

Even in regard to a technological design?

No, but you said there are no rules, which is false. And if it's, say, a sheep-raping machine, sure, even in regard to a technological design.

I dont think you even know what youre blabbering about . No one will really take this seriously.No, he's basically correct. Sorry.Answer: KE weapons kick butt.KE weapons are very dangerous. But they're a little slow for my taste – at least against moving targets.Ummm...

Isn't this science fiction?Fiction, or science fiction?

You have to decide if you're just going to make everything up or at least tip your hat to science. I prefer to do the second.What if it's as a plot device?Deus ex machina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina) is a pretty poor basis for storytelling. If you limit your weapons, you have to work harder. From a storytelling P.O.V., that's a good thing.The best way to use plasma as aweapon is to create a device that gives the plasma the fuel it needs to keep up the nuclear reaction. then placesaid device in a ball of plasma contained by an EMF. since you are labering on about Hard scifi then you should know what that means.That won't work: electrostatic pressure will blow your plasma ball apart.and scince you cliam to want to be "Hard" Scifi then you should dump your FTL systems aswell.There are a number of ways to beat Einstein's limit. Warp drives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive) are the best.

Granted, such drives are speculative, but not impossible. Plasma weapons, OTOH, are.[NS]Eraclea,

The thing with FUTURE TECH, is that it is all MADE UP in one form or another. The technology does not exist today which is why it is called Future Technoloty. I mean hello. Just cause the current mathematical equasions don't work for stuff such as the Death Stars main planet killing cannon doesn't mean that there will be a mathematical equasion that will make it work in say, 300 years or so.

And for reference, there are Lasers in todays current world, and they don't release that much heat. Just ask Russia and the US. Both have working prototypes of laser weaponry.300 years from now we will know more than we do today, to be sure. But things we know today will not be untrue; Einstein, for instance, did not invalidate Newton – rather, he extended Newton's work.

More important, though, is simple intellectual honesty. Again, you need to ask yourself: is this fiction only, or science fiction? If the latter, then just making stuff up isn't really justifiable.Yes, yes, yes... we've heard it all before.

But you're missing the whole point. If all FT were based on real physics then Faster-than-light travel could never occur. Not Ever. Given the vast expanse of space and the immense distances even between stars considered close, you would have a very sllllooooowww, very boring, game on your hands.See above.The point behind FT is not to following the laws of physics in their strictest sense. That removes all the fun.Does it?

Just making things up because they are cool is not good play; imagination based on sound speculation makes for a more believable – and hence more engaging - game.I am also of the opinion that you just don't like Mr. Lucas' works, or anything that is related to them. That is of course your decision, but bear in mind one crucial fact, which I will state slowly and clearly so everyone realises something: IT. IS. FICTION. NONE. OF. IT. IS. REAL!Lucas' work? No, none of it is real. But his work is pitifully poor.

But other (better) writers (like Niven and Bova) are far more realistic. Why should we copy the work of a second-rate hack writer when we can strive for quality?Following this arguement, we can draw a single conclusion. Due to the fact it is fiction, and thus not entirely bound by physics as we understand them, certain events can occur that couldn't possibly occur in real life. It's a game, man, try not to take it too seriously.See the remarks about deus ex machina above.Eraclea look at this link and tell me what you think of this.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=370283It's quite reasonable. It would be a monumental work of engineering – a wonder of the world – but it's certainly reasonable....I think you're all missing the main point, that FT nations are NOT BASED 100% ON REALITY!!

IF THEY WERE, THEY WOULD BE MT NATIONS!!

and, just in case you don't realize this...


NATIONSTATES IS A GAME!!!

It isn't meant to be 100% accutate to the dot! It's meant to be a game where people get together online and have fun!Not 100% doesn't mean 0%.

To say: “This is fiction, so I can do whatever I want,” is just plain laziness.Indeed, there are flaws in every science fiction. Indeed, you can see that there are many holes in the physics of Star Wars, holes that by our current science means that it's impossible to build such things. But you know what?

It.

Doesn't.

Matter.

Star Wars technology is just a backdrop from which to tell a story.There are many backdrops to tell a story. You don't have to throw realism to the wind to produce something enjoyable. In fact, you'll get better results if you don't.

Plus ask yourself this: if you're just making things up and so is everybody else, how can you know if your stuff is better than the stuff other people are making up? Why, you can't. You have no basis for knowing if your ships are faster or slower than the other guys', if your defenses can block his attack or vice versa. It's all B³ (Bluff, Bluster, and B_llsh_t): who can outwank who, and how outrageously. In that sense, if you really think that FT is “all made up”, then your games are nothing more or less than the Grand Godmodders Ball.

Which, sadly, is most of what I see: wank, counterwank. No one uses cunning, or skill, or finesse. Why bother, when you can just wank away? You only have to use tactics, strategy, and planning when you accept limitations on your ability. But in II FT, nobody wants to do that, because it means getting whipped by the next lying b_st_ard along the line - you know, the one who doesn't accept any limits because he's too lazy to think or too emotionally insecure to risk defeat.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now, as far as my weapons go, I use a mixture of q-switched gas dynamic lasers (they're part of the 2300AD canon, but they're not that powerful), neutral particle beams (they're somewhat better), and bomb-pumped gamma-ray detonation lasers (these are one-shot devices that are mounted on missiles; they're analogous to shaped-charge fusion explosives, although it's not the plasma that kills – rather, it's the hard radiation). Most weapons strike with a force of 1-3 Mj per “hit” (although detonation lasers usually score multiple strikes). As impressive as the word “megajoule” sounds, the actual energy imparted per hit is only equal to a few sticks of TNT (which is still enough to damage most spacecraft).

To dissipate heat, all ships have radiators; some have droplet radiators where the heat discharge is immense.

And, for those who sneer about FTL drives, google “Broeck-Alcubierre (or Notario) warp drive”; I use an oscillating version of these proposed systems (generating hundreds of thousands of warp “pulses” every second, each carrying the vessel just a few thousands of kilometers before the warp manifold collapses).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some of you will sneer at the foregoing and scream, “Your sh_t is weak;” Against you, I reserve the right to employ my own “überwankweapons”: meson beams, microscopic relativistic exploding black holes, and defensive warp fields. All possible under our current understanding of quantum mechanics, relativity, and M-theory, and all very nasty. I'm still looking for a good method of heat elimination for these weapons, but I'm fairly sure that I'll come up with something...

Especially if it's to teach some deserving little punk a lesson.

Guys we were asked to drop this ... so why don't we?

I know I'm not really one to comment on the realism of tech, what with alternate dimensions, Daemons, sorcery and psykers, and all, but honestly thats the universe I prefer. 40k might be godmodding by any of the standards of "realism" but its the stories that can be told through it that intrigue me. A lot of my inspiration are the Black Library stories, the fluff in 40k codexes. Thats what I long for, combat and glory amongst the stars, immense armies clashing in pursuit of victory, for Gods or Empires.

Sure it might be a bit Sci-Fantasy but its what I love and what I've ultimately chosen for my basis in a freeform game that offers unprecedented fluidity and possibility.

Now, I'm not going to criticise your hard sci-fi wants for realism, I'd happily RP with any tech base, and I do make concessions on the grounds of my technology. What we need, is not for people to acknowledge scientific realism as a rule; the laws of physics cannot entirely apply within this NSverse. What we need are basic guidelines that draw a line in the sand and place variant tech-bases in context.

I know I'm not really one to comment on the realism of tech, what with alternate dimensions, Daemons, sorcery and psykers, and all, but honestly thats the universe I prefer. 40k might be godmodding by any of the standards of "realism" but its the stories that can be told through it that intrigue me. A lot of my inspiration are the Black Library stories, the fluff in 40k codexes. Thats what I long for, combat and glory amongst the stars, immense armies clashing in pursuit of victory, for Gods or Empires.

Sure it might be a bit Sci-Fantasy but its what I love and what I've ultimately chosen for my basis in a freeform game that offers unprecedented fluidity and possibility.Strangely, I am not at all critical of 40K, precisely because it is “science fantasy”. It is for this reason that I have suggested (elsewhere) that we need to have cleaner divisions between sci-fi subgenres.

Then those of us who think that genres should be defined and further identified should get together and batter out a set of rules to be regarded in pursuit of FT

url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina]Deus ex machina[/url] is a pretty poor basis for storytelling. If you limit your weapons, you have to work harder. From a storytelling P.O.V., that's a good thing.

I do limit my weapons, if you ask anybody my tech is a mix of soft and hard sci fi. Just enough to be competant but not too wanky. And sir, I do tell good stories, you ask anybody they'd tell you that they are quite humourous and entertaining.

See, I use humour and whatnot to tell a story. For example, I have an auto dressing device. I don't know how it works but I have it.

Deus ex machina isn't bad anyway, only when it's abused. Anyway this threads should be closed... what else is there to discuss?

Also, missiles beat lasers anyday >_>

Then those of us who think that genres should be defined and further identified should get together and batter out a set of rules to be regarded in pursuit of FT

This has been tried before and has always failed, for the reason that there's no way to enforce it.

Its not about enforcing it. Its about suggesting it, and hopefully the reasonable will follow it. The newbies will see it and see larger, respected nations using it and theoretically follow.

It might not work, but its worth another shot. Theres too many threads, whats up with II, whats up with FT, Tech, Mecha....Where'll it end unless we draw a line in the sand.

Because the principles of modern science are now extremely well-founded and highly researched, as opposed to the past when they were barely understood at all. The strongest foundations of science are unlikely to be overturned, hence the requirements for some handwaving in far-FT. Don't in any way pretend it's anything but that.

Ever heard of gravity? heh, that pretty much tossed out the window everything that came before the year 1687. Then, get this, our understanding of gravity was even thrown out the window by Einstein and the theory of relativity! OMG!

So, excuse me for being an ass, but it is quite possible and even easy at times to completely topple the present "status quo" on acceptable, known, hard fact science. All it requires is proof.

Its not about enforcing it. Its about suggesting it, and hopefully the reasonable will follow it. The newbies will see it and see larger, respected nations using it and theoretically follow.

It might not work, but its worth another shot. Theres too many threads, whats up with II, whats up with FT, Tech, Mecha....Where'll it end unless we draw a line in the sand.

*nods solemnly* Chronosia here is correct. We cannot remain cognizant of our situation until we create that line.

Last comment on the Mechs, if I could concieve such things graphically you'd understand. Its not powered armor, its not a mech, its not many thiings..its an offshoot of Earth based technology. Also...how could my people have an 'inefficent' design when it is not based on human models, what is with everyone thinking my nation has humanity on it!? Humanity is weak! We are not powerful and have many problems physically. Again I cannot and will not even discuss what it looks like in this thread. What I have in my head is clearly not is in your head.

Unified Sith... this is directed at you.

Using Deus Ex Machina for a story is okay, but let's put a limit on it for those who clearly do not want to press limits. On the aspect of original tech (this does not and has never applied to all FT, but simply the creation and discussion of what is 'realistic' in FT (sadly that is vague)).

The original SW tech is way unbelievable by fundamental science, it will always be that way, it defies everything we know about nature when brought to a simple level. That's unavoidable, and its often to kick the story off.

The point of this is to stop canon-derived 'original' tech from going too far and also make sure that people with lesser tech know just how impossible this tech is, so if they go to do it they can choose a general set to follow, but also at the same time enlighten them on what is realistic if they want to be so.

Last little thing, I picked random people and a random page to do my arguement, you do not find every example in a paper, and nor should you find it in my posts, I am not being paid to do this, my academic career is not based on this, I did this out of concern, annoyance at some FT RPers and general scientific explanations to back up doing X because of Y, of which both and even the basics of Y are impossible. (Let's use Kyanges old wormhole + black hole attack to instantly destroy anything he chose, this breaks the basics of physics and everything ever known about wormholes and black holes properties. This is yet another example of a Tech gone too far.)

So just keep this in mind.

Granted, such drives are speculative, but not impossible. Plasma weapons, OTOH, are.

Thank you. This was the point of much of my initial post, the plasma just does not survive long enough to work. Definately not on the distance seen in Star Wars.

The same would apply to 'turbolasers' because they are plasma, they use heated gas to produce plasma. Just because the name changes does not change what we read or see.

I find it very hard to believe that you can correspond Star Wars in terms of realism, given its place as science fantasy (It basically is, all it is is a fantasy story told in Space. The force is thus magic, go figure) and that fact that your basing science on shoddy visuals.

A universe with droid and clone armies, 'the force', various alien races, world-destroying battlestations, etc, etc simply can't be taken seriously in terms of realism. Thats essentially your point. But realism hardly matters on NS, where we make our own rules. Yes there should be something in place so every Tom, Dick and Harry isn't throwing around black holes, but it has to be acknowledged that not all the conventional rules of physics can or should be acknowledged.

What we need, as has been indicated, is some system.

The story, however, is all I care about. It ought to remain key

I find it very hard to believe that you can correspond Star Wars in terms of realism, given its place as science fantasy (It basically is, all it is is a fantasy story told in Space. The force is thus magic, go figure) and that fact that your basing science on shoddy visuals.

A universe with droid and clone armies, 'the force', various alien races, world-destroying battlestations, etc, etc simply can't be taken seriously in terms of realism. Thats essentially your point. But realism hardly matters on NS, where we make our own rules. Yes there should be something in place so every Tom, Dick and Harry isn't throwing around black holes, but it has to be acknowledged that not all the conventional rules of physics can or should be acknowledged.

What we need, as has been indicated, is some system.

The story, however, is all I care about. It ought to remain key


You miss the point of the thread.

As far as I am concerned conventional rules of physics need apply unless they have some major original purpose that is just to not wage epeen wars. Espically on original tech.

Ever heard of gravity? heh, that pretty much tossed out the window everything that came before the year 1687.

No, it didn't. Before 1687 we had already built massive trebuchets that could hurl payloads the size of cars at a target with reasonable accuracy considering their machining standards. We understood very well the practical aspects of gravity, just not the theoretical aspects. Nothing suddenly became possible that wasn't before just because Newton proposed a theory that described the force more accurately.

Then, get this, our understanding of gravity was even thrown out the window by Einstein and the theory of relativity! OMG!

Erm, not at all. Newtonian physics can still predict accurately how an object under the influence of gravity will behave. Einstein's theory better describes exotic situations and offers further insight into the workings of it, but to claim that Newton's theories were thrown out when they are still used today is simple ignorance.

So, excuse me for being an ass, but it is quite possible and even easy at times to completely topple the present "status quo" on acceptable, known, hard fact science. All it requires is proof.

Wrong. Newton toppled nothing, he simply offered a mechanism by which a known but poorly understood force operated, and to do so he went on the observations of objects under the effects of gravity made by others. Einstein did not completely topple Newton: Newton's equations still work just as well as they always did and can still accurately predict the motion of objects, Einstein's are simply more accurate and therefore better for more precise calculations.

The change between Newton and Einstein was refinement, it doesn't mean Newton's theory of gravity suddenly stopped working.

Eraclea;11683477']As far as I am concerned conventional rules of physics need apply unless they have some major original purpose that is just to not wage epeen wars. Espically on original tech.

There are points where the laws of physics should indeed be suspended; for example, faster than light drives are a necessary plot device if you actually want to visit other star systems in your own lifetime; the only other option would be Serenity's woefully stupid setup where a single system somehow contains dozens of habitable moons.

Realism is generally helped by not dwelling on such things and wasting time with endless pseudoscience-loaded babble about how they supposedly work; just go with 'yes, I know this won't work, but it creates an interesting scenario for us to RP in, so it's ok.'

Bad breaking of physics is when you start doing it either for no reason at all or to 'win' the RP, or when it steps entirely outside the bounds of what the other player is willing to suspend their disbelief for. A little fantasy is good for any scifi story that isn't so dry it can be used as feminine protection, but too much and it starts replacing the story, as in Star Trek: Voyager.

The best way to handle it is:

1. Don't ever explain how it works, unless it really does work. Give it a name, say what it does, leave it at that. Nobody on this or any other planet cares about how you manipulate the phased quantum fucktuations in your di-hybrid engine core matrix. Also avoid making up exotic physics just to make your own stuff better, ala Gundam's various Minovsky-things.

2. If someone asks how it works, tell them it's there because [reason] and you don't know how it works. Don't pretend you have a PhD in 'quantum mechanics' and roll out the gibberish.

3. Recognise it is absolutely impossible for any technology short of 'press the button to win the game' wank to be a godmode in and of itself. Godmoding is in how the technology is used, not in what it is.

4. Avoid claiming any technology has no disadvantages, and try to keep realistic ones in mind. In particular, avoid obnoxious abuse of nanotechnology, biotechnology and the word 'plasma.'

Also avoid thinking of technology in terms of new versus old, with new always being better than old. This doesn't happen, and it would be entirely reasonable to expect a technician on a spaceship to still have a screwdriver and hammer in his toolbox. Don't have everything suddenly become 'high tech,' it's massively unconvincing.

5. Quantum effects affect objects on the subatomic scale. Unless your spacedyship only exists at this scale, they cannot affect your entire spacedyship. Using names of quantum effects != realism.

6. Try to build the technology your people would actually build, not just the things that are a hundred exawatts more RAR than the other guy.

There are a number of ways to beat Einstein's limit. Warp drives are the best.

Granted, such drives are speculative, but not impossible. Plasma weapons, OTOH, are.I'm curious. A phenomenon that has never been observed, never been experimentally proven, and requires the existence and utilisation of funky things like negative energy densities (Similarly, never observed, and never experimentally proven) is feasible, whereas a phenomenon that has been observed, experimentally replicated, used in weaponised form (A nuclear blast turns the atmosphere in its vicinity into a plasma), is used in (Low-energy) beam form (Charged particle beams) and discussed for applications as a weapons system (Again, charged particle beams) is not?

Its not about enforcing it. Its about suggesting it, and hopefully the reasonable will follow it. The newbies will see it and see larger, respected nations using it and theoretically follow.

It might not work, but its worth another shot. Theres too many threads, whats up with II, whats up with FT, Tech, Mecha....Where'll it end unless we draw a line in the sand.

Heh, you'll get no argument from me there! 'FT' is a very broad brush, a little too broad.

..Back to the original point of the thread..

FT and FFT nations have no way to drive our imaginative little starships based on modern standards, so, thus, we have to take a wild guess at what things will be like a thousand years from now.

We can't have ships the size of moons driven by gasoline for Christ's sake. At least our idea's are feasible, what about the elven and fantasy nations that fling magic at one another?

Heh, you'll get no argument from me there! 'FT' is a very broad brush, a little too broad.

The reason for that is that everyone has their own FT tech base that they want to work with. One person might want SW, another might prefer Trek, someone else might like Stargate. The OP likes mechs, and I'm currently using interplantary ships with no FTL. None of those tech bases are compatable with each other.

IMO, there will never be a standard tech base in II. The only way to get standardization is with an off-site forum, which means a much smaller player base.

The reason for that is that everyone has their own FT tech base that they want to work with. One person might want SW, another might prefer Trek, someone else might like Stargate. The OP likes mechs, and I'm currently using interplantary ships with no FTL. None of those tech bases are compatable with each other.

IMO, there will never be a standard tech base in II. The only way to get standardization is with an off-site forum, which means a much smaller player base.

Standardised technology isn't the proposal. Establishing more genres is. At the moment we have Past Tech, Modern Tech, Post Modern Tech... and then everything else, unless you consider 'Space Tech' to be an 'official' genre too. What we need are some sub-divisions within FT... like Low FT, Medium FT and High FT. Those are just examples, of course, but that's the kind of thing we need.

Eraclea;11683477']You miss the point of the thread.

As far as I am concerned conventional rules of physics need apply unless they have some major original purpose that is just to not wage epeen wars. Espically on original tech.

Well, I don't agree. There are certain techs where you can't apply the laws of physics. To be, soft sci-fi as a majority has that problem. What we need, as I've said, is some kind of system that puts all the sci-fi into context.

If people were willing to make an effort and set it up then maybe we'd make some progress. But the simple fact is things like FTL need to be cut some slack in terms of physics, and if its a question regarding the physics of 40k or SW, then frankly you'd be a fool to look for the physics behind either and expect a sense of realism

Since this is ooc I might like to direct the VERY misguided author of this thread to the stickies. Primarily the sticky on godmodding. In fact many things people think are godmodding, arent. However what true godmodding is, is telling another person what they can and cannot do. That and J00 r week I r invinsible, I win u looz. Thats god modding. Period, this is FT. We dont HAVE to explain how it works anymore then we have to explain how magic works.

Anyone that comes to NS thinking that its hard science and physics is rather silly, as its about writing. I could give two turds about gigawatts and petatons. I could care less, I just write things as they are. I have a mega death slow firing beam gun that kills ships in one shot then I have a mega death beam cannon that kills ships in one shot. I dont need to have "stats" to compare to yours. I also dont need to waste time, munging up my RP's with utterly dull and pointless physics that slows them down and takes away from the writing.

And ISD's dont have 200 gigaton turbo lasers, the person who wrote that fan site was rather deluded. The asteroids werent vaporised by Turbolasers, jsut broken to pieces.

As for levels of FT, well deal with it. Remember non FTL ships can be considered to be PMT, in fact Gundam could be considered PMT for instance. Whereas ST could actually be considered FFT, SW and Robotech for instance could still easily match and exceed them. Wing commander vs SW same thing, totally even match. Now as for people who are just wanky, Ie ships that dont die, refusing to accept losses due to tech wank, well thats not right. Strategy is not layers of ubar tech built on ubar tech. You will see that at any tech level, even MT.

As for being too high tech. Currently AMF a MT nation is fighting a war against Melkor, a FT nation. There are ways around it if you are creative and focus less on zOMG statz0rs and more on WRITING.

Since this is ooc I might like to direct the VERY misguided author of this thread to the stickies. Primarily the sticky on godmodding. In fact many things people think are godmodding, arent. However what true godmodding is, is telling another person what they can and cannot do. That and J00 r week I r invinsible, I win u looz. Thats god modding. Period, this is FT. We dont HAVE to explain how it works anymore then we have to explain how magic works.

Anyone that comes to NS thinking that its hard science and physics is rather silly, as its about writing. I could give two turds about gigawatts and petatons. I could care less, I just write things as they are. I have a mega death slow firing beam gun that kills ships in one shot then I have a mega death beam cannon that kills ships in one shot. I dont need to have "stats" to compare to yours. I also dont need to waste time, munging up my RP's with utterly dull and pointless physics that slows them down and takes away from the writing.

And ISD's dont have 200 gigaton turbo lasers, the person who wrote that fan site was rather deluded. The asteroids werent vaporised by Turbolasers, jsut broken to pieces.

As for levels of FT, well deal with it. Remember non FTL ships can be considered to be PMT, in fact Gundam could be considered PMT for instance. Whereas ST could actually be considered FFT, SW and Robotech for instance could still easily match and exceed them. Wing commander vs SW same thing, totally even match. Now as for people who are just wanky, Ie ships that dont die, refusing to accept losses due to tech wank, well thats not right. Strategy is not layers of ubar tech built on ubar tech. You will see that at any tech level, even MT.

As for being too high tech. Currently AMF a MT nation is fighting a war against Melkor, a FT nation. There are ways around it if you are creative and focus less on zOMG statz0rs and more on WRITING.

what is FFT?

what is FFT?
Far Future Tech. Where people run galaxies and spaceships are as cheap as today's cars.

I'm curious. A phenomenon that has never been observed, never been experimentally proven, and requires the existence and utilisation of funky things like negative energy densities (Similarly, never observed, and never experimentally proven) is feasible, whereas a phenomenon that has been observed, experimentally replicated, used in weaponised form (A nuclear blast turns the atmosphere in its vicinity into a plasma), is used in (Low-energy) beam form (Charged particle beams) and discussed for applications as a weapons system (Again, charged particle beams) is not?In a word, yes.

First, the Wikipedia article is not the full story. I've downloaded about 20 academic papers on the subject, and the opinion on the theoretical possibility of warp drives is all over the place; follow some of the links given and you'll see this.

Negative energy is one of those areas where relativity and quantum mechanics differ. Relativity adopts the notion that negative energy can't exist from Newtonian mechanics, where the idea that mass, energy, or momentum can be negative was rejected as nonsensical. But quantum mechanics (and, quite specifically, Heisenberg uncertainty) requires it, and in 1948 Dutch physicist Henrik Casimir devised an experiment to create it.

Beyond that, we know that changes in the space-time metric can result in objects moving faster than the speed of light. We've seen it: distant galaxies are receding at speeds exceeding c, and we're pretty sure that's due to the expansion of the universe. So the fundamental concept behind the warp drive (moving space itself rather than the ship) is sound; that's why almost all of the objections to the idea are tied in with issues pertaining to quantum mechanics (energy densities, for instance) and not the basic warp mechanism itself.

BTW, it can be shown mathematically (and has) that all forms of FTL travel require negative energy, and many (such as wormholes) require even higher energy densities than warp drives. Worse, those densities must be sustained whereas warp fields can be “pulsed,” with the densities lasting only nanoseconds. This is analogous to the problem pf achieving stellar pressures to initiate nuclear fusion: the pressures are impossibly high – so high that sustaining them outside a star is virtually impossible – but achieving them for just a split second is possible.

This brings us to plasmas. Yes, you can create one: we have, in fact. But containing one is a serious problem. If it's charged, electrostatic forces will blow it apart - and sadly, most plasmas (thanks to their temperature) are ionized, and hence charged.

So now on to particle beams. Are particle beams plasma weapons? Well, technically, yes: but it's not the thermal content of the plasma that's doing the damage – it's the momentum of the plasma that does the damage. In that sense, we could think of a particle beam as a relativistic slugthrower – but nobody's going to call the thing a “particle machine gun” or “particle shotgun”. In that sense, I don't think it's fair to call particle beams “plasma weapons”.

But maybe that's a semantic hair I can't split; so let me qualify my earlier comment. In the sense of a “plasma weapon” being something that throws a big ball of superheated plasma at the enemy (the Romulan “plasma torpedo”), such weapons simply can not work.Don't ever explain how it works, unless it really does work. Give it a name, say what it does, leave it at that.Let me offer mild dissent: I find that I can't properly handle a technology if I don't have a sense of how it works. If I start creating “magical” devices (using the term in the Clarkean sense), then I find it far too easy to fall into the trap of not being able to describe them or account for their limitations properly. After all, if it's “magic”, it could do anything, right?

My FTL drives are the best example: once I know how they work, I can “design” ships that use such drives, I can determine their strengths and weaknesses, I can describe their behavior. It's a matter of getting the small touches right, which is very hard to do if I don't have a clear idea in my mind of how something works.

This could just be my problem, of course – everybody else could be immune to it – but I have a sneaking feeling that I'm not alone.

Sagit would qualify as FFT. My ships can travel anywhere in this galaxy. Intergalactic is more difficult, but not impossible. The science behind my tech is far beyond Terran understanding (OOC: in other words it's pulled out of my @$$), but it still has real weaknesses. Like the Asgard of SG1, the Sagit have trouble thinking in primitive terms. Their "impregnable" force-fields are good against energy-based tech, but not so good against old-fashioned missles.

Even though I don't even try to explain the "science" behind my tech, the strengths and weaknesses are explainable. Unexplainable science is probably more vulnerable to wank vs wank wars, but you could probably get that with "real" tech too.

Sagit would qualify as FFT. My ships can travel anywhere in this galaxy. Intergalactic is more difficult, but not impossible. The science behind my tech is far beyond Terran understanding (OOC: in other words it's pulled out of my @$$), but it still has real weaknesses. Like the Asgard of SG1, the Sagit have trouble thinking in primitive terms. Their "impregnable" force-fields are good against energy-based tech, but not so good against old-fashioned missles.

Even though I don't even try to explain the "science" behind my tech, the strengths and weaknesses are explainable. Unexplainable science is probably more vulnerable to wank vs wank wars, but you could probably get that with "real" tech too.The Kafer Associative (again, a so-called “canon” species from the 2300AD RPG) would probably be best classified as NFT (Near Future Tech) or LPMT (Late Post-Modern Tech); they're basically a PMT civilization with Broeck-Alcubierre (or Natario) micro-warp drives; for them, the cutting edge of science is quantum teleportation (still in the bulk solids stage), 32-state quantum computers with “fuzzy” logic (they're somewhat closer to this), nanotechnology (this is still pretty much a pipe dream), traversible wormholes (this is also something of a pipe dream, but they're working hard at it because - thanks to their advances in space-time metric engineering - they know that it is at least possible), vacuum power generation (there's debate over the practicality of this; just because you can create momentary concentrations of negative energy doesn't mean that you can build an “over unity” power generation system), and cybernetic implants (Kafer medical technology is very primitive). Gravitics and “hyperspace” drives are considered really far out.

In a word, yes.

First, the Wikipedia article is not the full story.
I know for a fact, that Rezo's far too wise to base his knowledge on Wiki-bloody-pedia.
I've downloaded about 20 academic papers on the subject,
I guess that makes you an expert.
and the opinion on the theoretical possibility of warp drives is all over the place; follow some of the links given and you'll see this.

Negative energy is one of those areas where relativity and quantum mechanics differ. Relativity adopts the notion that negative energy can't exist from Newtonian mechanics, where the idea that mass, energy, or momentum can be negative was rejected as nonsensical. But quantum mechanics (and, quite specifically, Heisenberg uncertainty) requires it, and in 1948 Dutch physicist Henrik Casimir devised an experiment to create it.
And quantum mechanics, which is fickle at best, flat out does not apply at macroscale.
Beyond that, we know that changes in the space-time metric can result in objects moving faster than the speed of light. We've seen it: distant galaxies are receding at speeds exceeding c, and we're pretty sure that's due to the expansion of the universe.
There's a difference between outracing your own light cone, and having an apparent speed faster than light. The fact that you don't know this clearly suggests you don't have the requisite understanding to make any authoritative statement on the matter. Yes, you can travel faster than light relative to something. If rocket A travels at 60%C in one direction, and rocket B travels the same speed in an opposite direction, to one another, they will appear to be going FTL. It's the same thing here. We're moving away from those galaxies. That doesn't mean that if you stood in front of either galaxy, it would hit you before you'd see it, because it was outracing its own light, which is the definition of FTL. What you're talking about is Not FTL, it's 'two objects going fast with a relative velocity exceeding C'This is analogous to the problem pf achieving stellar pressures to initiate nuclear fusion: the pressures are impossibly high – so high that sustaining them outside a star is virtually impossible – but achieving them for just a split second is possible.
Not to mention, the primary problem with FTL is one of causality. Because in a reltivistic universe, going FTL and retaining information presents severe problems.

You do not understand, but you will (Gorram it, I wish I was able to post with Vorlon Prime for that) the problems with nuclear fusion. The Japanese TRIAM-1M tokamak has run for over three hours without problems. The pressure required to initiate fusion is not the issue, the issue is our inability to make it a net energy gain process. Namely, the energy generated by our experimental fusion reactors is less than the energy required to keep them running.
This brings us to plasmas. Yes, you can create one: we have, in fact. But containing one is a serious problem. If it's charged, electrostatic forces will blow it apart - and sadly, most plasmas (thanks to their temperature) are ionized, and hence charged.
You are of course, incorrect, in a way. But it's a minor issue, and you probably just need to clarify what you're saying. In any case, you don't grasp what DA is saying. There are some very fundamental problems with going FTL, most notably, aside from the requirements of Alcuberrie et al's ideas for macro-scale negative energy, the violation of causality - cause and effect.
So now on to particle beams. Are particle beams plasma weapons? Well, technically, yes: but it's not the thermal content of the plasma that's doing the damage – it's the momentum of the plasma that does the damage. In that sense, we could think of a particle beam as a relativistic slugthrower – but nobody's going to call the thing a “particle machine gun” or “particle shotgun”.No, but they are called 'particle guns.' In that sense, I don't think it's fair to call particle beams “plasma weapons”.Plasma beams is one thing to call them which they are.
But maybe that's a semantic hair I can't split; so let me qualify my earlier comment. In the sense of a “plasma weapon” being something that throws a big ball of superheated plasma at the enemy (the Romulan “plasma torpedo”), such weapons simply can not work.Let me offer mild dissent: I find that I can't properly handle a technology if I don't have a sense of how it works. If I start creating “magical” devices (using the term in the Clarkean sense), then I find it far too easy to fall into the trap of not being able to describe them or account for their limitations properly. After all, if it's “magic”, it could do anything, right?Understanding the mechanisms of a device and understanding its limits are not the same thing. Unless you've majored in computer science, with a nice dash of physics, you won't understand in any detail how your computer works, but you will (probably) understand what it does and can do. The same with all other clarketech.

If you actually want a means of FTL that doesn't spew all over existing scientific knowledge, use something like Babylon 5's hyperspace. An 'alternate space' where things can move along a shorter path, before re-entering normal space. This would seem to allow things to violate causality in the usual CTC manner, but doesn't, as the 'hyperspace' is also part of spacetime, and it does not therefore interfere with determinism. At no point does the ship exceed the speed of its own light. It's also much less difficult from an engineering perspective than Alcuberrie style warp drives, as it relies entirely on made up principles, you can say it only requires a few kilojoules to create a 'portal.'

There's lots of complicated workarounds, but they generally have to disregard either relativity, conservation of mass-energy, causality or any of the three. Or make shit up.

Now be nice.

First, I never claimed to be an expert. What I said was that there are scores of academic papers out there on the subject of achieving superluminal speeds via space-time engineering. You should take a look at some of them instead of just dismissing all of them as bunk.

With regards to the notion of circumventing relativistic limits on velocity by means of warping space-time, I have yet to see anyone with credentials to do so challenge Alcubierre's thought experiment on the grounds of causality. If you can point me to a paper that does this, then you should by all means do so. But the absence of such papers (I have yet to discover even one) suggests that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept from a relativistic point of view. People wouldn't be quibbling about energy conditions if there were something more fundamentally flawed with the idea – like a causality violation, for instance.

With regards to the motion of distant galaxies, I'm sure that you didn't intend to suggest that these bodies are actually flying away from us per se, as your (unintentionally erroneous) example (with two rockets) suggests¹. As you well know, Hubble's work (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble's_law) established that the universe is expanding several decades ago. Thus we really are looking at a case where it's not just the relative motion of objects in 3+1 space that is causing the movement we see: it's a change in the space-time metric itself.

I'm also sure that you didn't mean to suggest that a vehicle residing within a Lorentzian manifold moving faster than the speed of light would outrace its own light cone, because – of course – it wouldn't. It can't, in fact, because nothing can; if anything could, then either the laws of the universe would not be physically uniform in their application (Galileo and Newton) or the speed of light itself would not be an invariate constant (Maxwell). But again, I'm sure you knew this and just expressed yourself imprecisely; as we both know, a vessel residing in a bubble of warped space sees itself as being in free fall and as moving slower than (its own) light – because in fact, it is moving slower than light. It's the manifold (space) itself that's moving faster than light, but space – unlike matter and energy – is allowed to do that.

As you no doubt know, I am sure.

With regards to fusion, I'm sure that you didn't mean to suggest that the stellar pressures needed to trigger nuclear fusion were sustained for hours in the Japanese experiment you cite; as we both know, laboratory fusion (and, when it becomes a reality, commercial fusion) involves multiple fusion “events”, each on a nanosecond scale, triggered by repeated laser pulses rather than through a constant application of pressure and heat. In that sense, my statement stands: we can't sustain stellar conditions, but we can achieve them for an instant, and then achieve them again an instant later, and so forth. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Finally, I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that it doesn't help for me to try and understand the technology that I'm using; rather, I'm sure that you're just saying that we don't all need to do that, and of course I would agree.If you actually want a means of FTL that doesn't spew all over existing scientific knowledge, use something like Babylon 5's hyperspace. An 'alternate space' where things can move along a shorter path, before re-entering normal space. This would seem to allow things to violate causality in the usual CTC manner, but doesn't, as the 'hyperspace' is also part of spacetime, and it does not therefore interfere with determinism. At no point does the ship exceed the speed of its own light. It's also much less difficult from an engineering perspective than Alcuberrie style warp drives, as it relies entirely on made up principles, you can say it only requires a few kilojoules to create a 'portal.'That's a valid alternative (well, sort of), but only if we hold Heim theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory) or something like it to be true. The problem there is that M-theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory), and probably not Heim theory, is more likely to the “correct” description of the universe - and M-theory doesn't support the notion that there is something called hyperspace out there that we can use to our benefit.

(Besides which, we're still left with the question of why it only takes a few hours to get anywhere in hyperspace: why should it? Because we'd like it to?)There's lots of complicated workarounds, but they generally have to disregard either relativity, conservation of mass-energy, causality or any of the three. Or make shit up.I'm pretty sure that warp drives violate neither relativity, causality, or thermodynamics. They may require too much total energy or impossibly high energy densities, but the jury's still out on those questions.

On the whole, though, I feel that it's better that than just making things up.

¹It's flawed because c can not be exceeded through simple vector addition. But I'm sure you knew that, too, and simply mistated yourself.

With regards to the notion of circumventing relativistic limits on velocity by means of warping space-time, I have yet to see anyone with credentials to do so challenge Alcubierre's thought experiment on the grounds of causality.
Yers... Because the problems with it are more obvious, namely, the assumption that you can apply a quantum phonomenon to macroscale in a meaningful, scalar way. If that were possible, people would spontaneously appear and disappear, and all sorts of other quantum weirdness would be part of everyday (hah) life. You will admit, the requirement of a vast amount of negative energy is a far more immediate problem, particularly if you include Hawking's CPC, a relatively easy way of rendering causality problems moot - indeed, that's probably the easiest way to eliminate them. The short answer to how causality is a problem, is because FTL allows travellers to be aware of things that have happened in their frame of reference and, communicate this information to someone for whom the event has yet to happen, and thus prevent its cause, creating an unsolveable paradox. Of course, with CPC, a heart attack happens to someone before this can happen, or so on.
If you can point me to a paper that does this, then you should by all means do so. But the absence of such papers (I have yet to discover even one)
You've downloaded a whole 'twenty' papers on theoretical spacetravel. And you haven't discovered one... why, that must mean such objections don't exist. And no, I don't want to go and try and find a published paper on the matter, any more than you seem to have a desire to post your sources, barring wikipedia, of course.
suggests that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the concept from a relativistic point of view. People wouldn't be quibbling about energy conditions if there were something more fundamentally flawed with the idea – like a causality violation, for instance.Oh, there is, it's just there's a cheap way to potentially 'get out of it' that means the more serious objections to FTL are variously the insane costs of spacetime engineering and asymtotic energy requirements for movement.

With regards to the motion of distant galaxies, I'm sure that you didn't intend to suggest that these bodies are actually flying away from us per se,
Well, they are, generally (last I heard, at least), but not at such velocities.
as your (unintentionally erroneous) example (with two rockets) suggests¹. As you well know, Hubble's work (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble's_law) established that the universe is expanding several decades ago. Thus we really are looking at a case where it's not just the relative motion of objects in 3+1 space that is causing the movement we see: it's a change in the space-time metric itself.
Which is a similar irrelevance to FTL travel. These galaxies will not outrun their own light, any more than our own will (which will seem to be moving at similar rates when observed from them) and be able to observe themselves in the past, as one would be with FTL travel, the relevance is only really peripheral (the mutability of spacetime) so you shouldn't really hold them up as any kind of example proving the plausibility of Alcuberrie drives. It is not FTL travel, and your use of it to say there is observed FTL motion is erroneous. These objects are not, as you claim, moving at 'speeds exceeding C' - they will never move ahead of light emitted by them, and be in a position to see themselves in the past - but rather, they appear to be, when observed from Earth.
I'm also sure that you didn't mean to suggest that a vehicle residing within a Lorentzian manifold moving faster than the speed of light would outrace its own light cone, because – of course – it wouldn't. It can't, in fact, because nothing can; if anything could, then either the laws of the universe would not be physically uniform in their application (Galileo and Newton)
*Whistles nonchalantly, stuffs his hands in his pockets, and sidles away from that sentance, trying not to look guilty*
or the speed of light itself would not be an invariate constant (Maxwell). But again, I'm sure you knew this and just expressed yourself imprecisely; as we both know, a vessel residing in a bubble of warped space sees itself as being in free fall and as moving slower than (its own) light – because in fact, it is moving slower than light. It's the manifold (space) itself that's moving faster than light, but space – unlike matter and energy – is allowed to do that.

As you no doubt know, I am sure.

Yes. But for the problem of causality worries, it's still doing so, in essence, because it allows the traveller to observe himself in the past, and thus dodge around with frames of reference, and potentially observe something, and then insert himself into the events chain leading up to it. There's a simple enough way to write it off, as I said above.

With regards to fusion, I'm sure that you didn't mean to suggest that the stellar pressures needed to trigger nuclear fusion were sustained for hours in the Japanese experiment you cite; as we both know, laboratory fusion (and, when it becomes a reality, commercial fusion) involves multiple fusion “events”, each on a nanosecond scale, triggered by repeated laser pulses rather than through a constant application of pressure and heat. In that sense, my statement stands: we can't sustain stellar conditions, but we can achieve them for an instant, and then achieve them again an instant later, and so forth. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Conditions cannot be duplicated exactly, nor simultaneously. That doesn't mean it's impossible, or even terribly difficult, to duplicate them consistantly. You're correct in that the exact same mechanism isn't used, though, that I'll certainly conceed. Of course, I'm not entirely sure why you brought it up now. Of course, in relation to plasma weapons, it's not really that relevant, the mechanism is likely not going to be 'artificially produced stellar plasma at X density' except in the most insane examples. Most 'plasma weapons' tend to act in a manner entirely unlike actual plasma, leading me to think, most of the time, that a plasma rifle is as 'plasma' as it is 'rifled.' You ought to see some of the really freaking insane shit I explain 'plasma weapons' as - ironically... spacetime-manipulation twinkiness that suggests making an Alcuberrie style warp drive would be trivially easy. Joy, I guess I can make FTl plasma-guns at a reasonable cost... E.E. Smith, here I come.:p

Anyway, a 'plasma' weapon being a dangerous thing isn't that much of a stretch compared to FTL, anyway, unless you would like to stand in front of a plasma torch. A Romulan Plasma Torpedo is a much bigger stretch than 'any kind of plasma weapon' (hell, it's a bigger stretch than FTL, too, given that the damn thing was FTL) and various other types (with the exception of 'plasma flamethrowers') of sci-fi plasma gun are seriously implausible in terms of engineering, but I reject your claim that they're all more unlikely than spacetime engineering with massive gluts of galactic-cluster-luminosity level negative energies.

Finally, I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that it doesn't help for me to try and understand the technology that I'm using; rather, I'm sure that you're just saying that we don't all need to do that, and of course I would agree.
I'd say you it probably doesn't. You could be doing something more productive than worrying about technical questions no one's ever going to call you on and for which you need no justification.
That's a valid alternative (well, sort of), but only if we hold Heim theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory) or something like it to be true. The problem there is that M-theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory), and probably not Heim theory, is more likely to the “correct” description of the universe - and M-theory doesn't support the notion that there is something called hyperspace out there that we can use to our benefit.
Neither (nor most of their cousins, last I checked) of them have a shred of experimental backing, and usually compete for explaining the same phonomena, and can therefore be totally ignored without any impact on any kind of story, unless one wishes to use them for something.
(Besides which, we're still left with the question of why it only takes a few hours to get anywhere in hyperspace: why should it? Because we'd like it to?)
Damn straight. If you're going to make up an FTL drive, it's going to be at least partly convinient, or it wouldn't be used as a hyperdrive! Oddly enough, Warhammer, of all things, had that, in some of its older stuff. There were thousands of 'alternative universes' to the warp discovered in the lab. It's just none of them were even remotely useful for interstellar transit, and thus hadn't been seized on by engineers.
I'm pretty sure that warp drives violate neither relativity, causality, or thermodynamics. They may require too much total energy or impossibly high energy densities, but the jury's still out on those questions.
More that the defence lawyer's still out, I'd say, looking for a solution that'd make them a shade more practical.

Oh, and a bit I snipped out this that I shouldn't have, yes, I have read numerous bits about theoretical FTL drives via spacetime manipulation, but it was many years ago when I last bothered with such things.

Here's (http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000089.html) a fairly concise and elegant summary of the potential paradox. It's important to note that ansibles don't have to be used, more ships are quite sufficient, but make the example more complex.

EDIT: Essentially, you've got to ditch one of "Special Relativity, Causality, or FTL" or add a means to control paradoxes. CPC, seems to be the most obvious, if least literarily satisfying way to do so. I've seen a few others, too.

Yet more reasons for me to use instantaneous FTL. No causality violations possible! Hoo-ah!

Yet more reasons for me to use instantaneous FTL. No causality violations possible! Hoo-ah!

Yes they are. You just do the same thing. In the culture.org example, instead of signalling, Alice and Dave either make jumps themselves, or send other people in their fleets to make jumps, or use message drones to make jumps. You get the picture.

You do realise that a good portion of FT nations shun SW tech. I, for, based my nation's advanced tech on different applications of using the 'strong nuclear force' which binds nuclei together. Kendari and Otagia and plenty of others have custom tech.
(snip)

...wow, I was cited as an example in a random thread!:D

Anyway, on the actual topic of the thread: lack of realism and godmodding are not the same thing. Certainly most energy weapons are far from realistic by modern standards, and many lack any but the slightest chance of ever resembling anything possible. This is no reason not to use them, as long as everyone present in the thread agrees.

Please stop claiming that Star Wars weapons are lasers just because of their names. They are clearly not lasers, or indeed any form of purely light-based weapon, because their properties are wildly different than those of light. They travel well below light speed, and glow in a vacuum - how much more obvious can it get?

Also, don't base your assumptions about the feasibility of FFT devices based on the efficiency of modern technology. Just because we lack the means to accomplish something efficiently now doesn't mean we will never find a way of doing so. While it is extremely unlikely that any fundamental scientific principles as we currently understand them will be proven wrong, it is quite possible that our technology will eventually advance beyond anything that seems reasonable to expect at this time, at least in some areas.

[sidtrack]Otagia, how are your invasion plans coming?[/sidetrack]

Oh, and... *shakes fist at Eraclea* Curse your typos! Now I'm going to have to design a Conan based FT culture!

Yes they are. You just do the same thing. In the culture.org example, instead of signalling, Alice and Dave either make jumps themselves, or send other people in their fleets to make jumps, or use message drones to make jumps. You get the picture.

Well, if it's truly instantaenous, there's no way you can send a message, thus you can't violate causality. I think. I of course reserve the right to be dead wrong.

Kendari: Sorry for the wait, school's been rather hectic lately. Should have a post up by tonight.

EDIT: Yep, I'm wrong. Reread the thing, and I've come to the conclusion that special relativity ceases to apply at FTL speeds, thus preserving my sanity.

Otagia: I understand completely. Just figured I might as well check, since I was posting right after you here anyway.

Well, if it's truly instantaenous, there's no way you can send a message, You can drop out of FTL near to the other ship, and squirt a radio signal. If you've got high enough accelleration, you can even transfer over, and meet yourself.

COOL, I've found a new toursit fad! "Meet your actual self!" I shudder to think of such encounters turning sexy... Provided you then go on to move it into a time loop, it doesn't violate causality, either.

Sadly, I do not have time to continue this debate. You may take this as concession, or not - I don't care. I would simply rather spend what limited time I have RP'ing when I can, and a thread that I was waiting on has revived, so I'll finish with a couple of parting comments.

Saying that lasers aren't really lasers, and plasma weapons aren't really plasma weapons, but that each of these is really something else instead, is clearly counterproductive. If a turbolaser isn't really a laser, then don't call it a turbolaser, call it something else; if a plasma weapon is really a particle beam, then call it a particle beam - don't call it a plasma weapon; and if an ion cannon doesn't shoot a burst of charged particles (ions), don't call it an ion cannon - instead, call it what it actually is. I mean, how hard can this be? I mean, yes - you can declare an eagle to be a pig and then talk about what will hppen when pigs fly, but is this really helpful?

As for arguments against FTL on a basis of SR (Special Relativity), keep in mind that one of the assumptions of SR is a flat spacetime; this should make us cautious about applying the conclusions of SR (no superluminal travel) to space warps, since by definition warped space isn't flat. Thus, is should not be surprising that virtually all FTL schemes involve curved spacetime in one fashion or another; rather than trying to go head to head with SR, these schemes attempt to circumvent it.

As for causality, there are, in fact, warp metrics that do not produce CTC's (Alcubierre's original metric is an example of this, as a careful reading of his paper and other papers commenting upon it will reveal). Yes, it is possible to modify his metric to achieve CTC's, but this is not proof that the original metric violates causality; something else (like Hawking's CPC, to offer a trivial example) could make these modified metrics impossible to achieve without invalidating the original metric.

It is for this reason that I find the glib remark: “FTL, relativity, causality: choose two of the three,” less than compelling. The notion that causality violations are a consequence of FTL under SR is based on certain assumptions about the relationship between movement and coordinate time that may not be true in all cases where spacetime curvature is present; then too, the entire argument assumes that no other forces are working to preserve causality, perhaps in ways we don't yet understand (cf. Hawking, op. cit.).

Anyway, that's all I have time for. If you want to know more, read the literature: there are pages on the web with links to numerous papers on the subject, pro and con (http://omnis.if.ufrj.br/~mbr/warp/). Over a dozen years after Alcubierre's 1994 paper, the subject is hardly the dead letter CT would like us all to believe it is.

Now, in my years on NS I've seen many threads such as this. I may not be a physicist, but then, I don't pretend to be or strive to be. I came to NS for one reason and one reason alone.

TO HAVE FUN WITH MY MAKE BELIEVE NATION.

This is a freaking game. Its meant as entertainment not a scientific battlefield. Warp drive, hyperdrive, death stars, super space dreadnaughts do not exist and will not exist for quite some time to come. So why the hell are we debating how such things can work when they don't exist yet? Let alone that large prerequisites for them don't even exist yet.

My advice to FT NS'ers. If you want to use your "plasma cannons" go ahead and damn well do it. Its science FICTION. Meaning that while its loosely based on science fact, in the end its all make believe for us to have fun.

When you start trying to make everything hard science you start loosing the fun. Hence a large reason why I haven't been RPing in the past year. There are too many uptight pseudo-scientists on here trying to make everything confined within the parameters of reality.

Get a life and just enjoy the damn game. Get your heads out of your asses or your little science lab and just have some freaking fun.

And that's Crossman's opinion. So there. Do what you will. Keep arguing over the science of non-existant stuff or just have some fun. Now I don't mean Godmod. I mean have fun within reason. But don't be so anal about this stuff either.

Now, in my years on NS I've seen many threads such as this. I may not be a physicist, but then, I don't pretend to be or strive to be. I came to NS for one reason and one reason alone.

TO HAVE FUN WITH MY MAKE BELIEVE NATION.

This is a freaking game. Its meant as entertainment not a scientific battlefield. Warp drive, hyperdrive, death stars, super space dreadnaughts do not exist and will not exist for quite some time to come. So why the hell are we debating how such things can work when they don't exist yet? Let alone that large prerequisites for them don't even exist yet.

My advice to FT NS'ers. If you want to use your "plasma cannons" go ahead and damn well do it. Its science FICTION. Meaning that while its loosely based on science fact, in the end its all make believe for us to have fun.

When you start trying to make everything hard science you start loosing the fun. Hence a large reason why I haven't been RPing in the past year. There are too many uptight pseudo-scientists on here trying to make everything confined within the parameters of reality.

Get a life and just enjoy the damn game. Get your heads out of your asses or your little science lab and just have some freaking fun.

And that's Crossman's opinion. So there. Do what you will. Keep arguing over the science of non-existant stuff or just have some fun. Now I don't mean Godmod. I mean have fun within reason. But don't be so anal about this stuff either.


Very well said, old buddy. This is a prime example of why I'm ( Xeraph ) about to take a breather from NS. The extremes of hyper-science/techno-babble and players who haven't the basic rudiments of spelling/grammar have lessened the pleasure of PLAYING this GAME.

Just to clarify: you're not saying that there's no place for “hard” sci-fi here in NS, are you? That we're limited to “soft” sci-fi or - ideally - “space opera”?

Somehow, I don't think that's your intent - but that's certainly how you're sounding.

Just to clarify: you're not saying that there's no place for “hard” sci-fi here in NS, are you? That we're limited to “soft” sci-fi or - ideally - “space opera”?

Somehow, I don't think that's your intent - but that's certainly how you're sounding.


Not at all. But when the techies get all bent out of shape because a techni-fibrous anomaly can't exist in a multi-phasic universe due to sub-arrythmic waves in the space-time continuum and argue about it ad nauseum....well, as I said, it sort of takes the joy out of PLAYING THE GAME.

Yeah. I have no real problem with trying to RP "hard" sci-fi. I've just had some pretty bad experiences when players start trying to put hard sci-fi to the most futuristic and fantasy-like sci-fi "things" (for lack of a better term right now.) When people start arguing over super-advanced and not yet invented science it just sucks the fun out of the game.

I just see people take things a wee bit too seriously sometimes. Because in the end, its just a game and none of us actually have the ability to go out in our backyard and build a hyperspace gate using Dr. Soandso's theory of flibbityjibityquantumbabble.

Just enjoy the game. I know some people like science and like the hard scifi stuff. Just, take it easy.

This is a freaking game. Its meant as entertainment not a scientific battlefield. Warp drive, hyperdrive, death stars, super space dreadnaughts do not exist and will not exist for quite some time to come. So why the hell are we debating how such things can work when they don't exist yet? Let alone that large prerequisites for them don't even exist yet.

Because it benefits roleplay to have a sense of verisimilitude [since realism is a silly goal], and for that it's good to have your FT stuff have reasonable strengths and weaknesses, logistical requirements, costs and so on. The real problem for FT technology is people wanting all the good and none of the bad, ending in ridiculous things like nanowank assembly lines that can assemble a giant battleship in seconds with absolute precision like nanomachines can't.

In MT, it'd be like having a man with an RPG-7 blow up, say, the whole of Detroit, and claiming you don't need realistic limitations because it's just a game.

My advice to FT NS'ers. If you want to use your "plasma cannons" go ahead and damn well do it. Its science FICTION. Meaning that while its loosely based on science fact, in the end its all make believe for us to have fun.

It's also science fiction. If none of the science you bring forth to explain your rotating black hole acceleration ring makes the slightest bit of sense, you're just writing words for no reason other than to have them, Voyager-style.

If you name a real scientific principle or phenomenon, it's utterly unreasonable for you to expect people not to point it out when your named thingus totally fails to behave how it should.

Get a life and just enjoy the damn game.

Some people enjoy the game by playing realistic SciFi nations and find unrealistic ones damage their enjoyment. I see we're here with the usual 'let me play the game my way and screw yours' mode of egotism, here. More to the point, if it's an OOC thread like this one, there is no RP, and there is no story, so the technology or lack thereof must stand on its own.

As I said above, the most important thing is honesty. If it doesn't work, say so. Say why it's there in story terms, what limitations it has, and what it adds to the RP. That's the important part, not using the word 'quantum' 30 times in one paragraph because that makes things realistic.

In MT, it'd be like having a man with an RPG-7 blow up, say, the whole of Detroit, and claiming you don't need realistic limitations because it's just a game.How about just the area, say, between the Jeffries and Deerfield, especially around Cooley High? It really needs blowing up.. ;)

To GMC Military Arms, I completely agree with you. My main greivance is with the "real science" sci-fi players that go overboard during RPs. I also greatly disdain the wankers on the other side of the spectrum.

I just like finding compromises in all the real/fantasy sci-fi.

Because yes, I have some uberships that run on "wtf i have no clue how this works" power. But I make sure they have their limitations. Even with lots of AI they still use a large amount on manpower and take much more time to build, repair, etc.

I just find a balance between real and fantasy. I never like dealing with people on the extremes.