Oolite Bulletins

m4r35n357 wrote:

Alex wrote:

Not so many years ago it was thought that if you exceded 20mph you would suffocate,

I assume you are kidding?
Firstly, the people that claimed that were obviously complete feckwits who were unaware of the existence of the horse rider.

Nope wasn't joking about the 20mph thing, It was a common held belief just before the advent of steam trains.
Most horses could never do 20mph and certainly couldn't run faster for anything but a short time. There being no speed traps back then, who knew what speed they were doing? The majority of folks just thought 'Oo that's fast!'
If you tried to run a horse at 20mph for an hour, It'd be one dead horse long before the hour.

As for the speed of light, who knows, it's all theory. And theory like life is dynamic.
Watched a doco the other day about getting close to absolute zero and how it changes what we thought about physics, fasinating stuff. Wonder what would happen if you got to -100Kelvin? "Impossible!" I hear cried around the world.

"Sorry! I didn't know it was impossible before I did it"
Don't remember who said that, but always loved it.

The difference Alex, about 20mph and suffocation - there was no proof - it was an assumption with no supporting maths or experimentation.

The calculation of absolute zero - it's been well known approximately what it was for a long time - only two things have changed - 1) the ability to measure it accurately 2) the ability to actually reach that temperature experimentally.

(When I was doing Physics (1990-94) it was 0K was -273C, and we were getting down to about -272.8, by the time I'd finished by degree it was -273.16 and we were within a few millikelvin, but it's only refining, it's not suddenly going to be recalculated to be -300 deg C.

As for the speed of light, there are theories that allow wriggle room to move distances where the distance covered in the time taken to cover it apparently exceed the speed of light, but they all, in one way or another, involve contracting the distance not increasing the speed. In "normal" space as we understand it, the speed of light is an unbreakable barrier, and there's an awful lot of maths and experiments to support it. As a physicist I'm not going to say we will never find a way to move great distances in tiny amounts of time (I hope we do!), but they will not involve exceeding the speed of light in normal spacetime.

Hi DH
I wasn't arguing the math or the theory for absolute zero. Or even the physics for C.
But as is well said "There is more to heaven and earth than is imagined" or summit like that.
The leap from absolute light speed to OOps warp 10 scotty could be like the invention of the decimal point or fractions, a type of math never imagined before.

There is always room for imagnitive invention. No matter how bizzar or 'impossible' it might seem.
Todays imagination has an uncanny way of being tomorrows fact. Even in physics. No absolutes in a theory, even if we consider them to be absolute at the moment.

As you might have noticed, I prefer not to worry about this moments reality in favour of imagination, to me it makes oolite more enjoyable. If I want to go faster than light. I bloomin well will

p.s. I bet the first faster than light travel is an accident by someone mucking around in their garage and has no idea of the physics.

Why get distracted by a cosmic speed limit, when there is a real scientific/engineering challenge to face: http://www.desy.de/user/projects/Physic ... ocket.html
OK, I'm not that optimistic that anything will happen in my lifetime, but isn't this preferable to chasing a physical impossibility?

OK, OK, I'm not going to argue the set in stone math and physics of the best in the world today.
Or past for that matter.
I just love the thought that we don't know anywhere near all and anything is still possible.

What if the base of math is flawed?
Physics would be too. Good grief everything we percieve to be in a factual world would be.. Err.. different.
But it's not! Or is it?
Who would notice if the change was universal as we see from our perspective?
YE, YE.
I know BS when I write it.
Still love Oolite's physics and wouldn't change it.

So as far as laws of RL science, Let them change.
Let the imagination run.
You never really, really know what tomorrow will bring.
But then I've heard "Tomorrow never comes"
Does that mean Yesterday was never there?

I know what this thought line means..
Not 'quite' enough of that wee spicy drink Ullreget.

Bar, another please.

Ahh....
Better sign off now. Before I forget where I left Gerty.

Have you seen what they charge for a berth here??
Going back to my Gerty for a slee......

Alex wrote:

p.s. I bet the first faster than light travel is an accident by someone mucking around in their garage and has no idea of the physics.

The first successful "cold fusion" experiment (if it's even remotely possible) might involve a lot of electron quantum tunneling where they at least defy the normal speed laws of the universe.

Switeck wrote:

Alex wrote:

p.s. I bet the first faster than light travel is an accident by someone mucking around in their garage and has no idea of the physics.

The first successful "cold fusion" experiment (if it's even remotely possible) might involve a lot of electron quantum tunneling where they at least defy the normal speed laws of the universe.

We don't mind this kind of thing going on at a quantum level

Remember a lecture (somewhere in the beginning of time ) about zero degrees Kelvin.
The teacher said something like: At 0 deg K exists just a weak vibration-movement.
Everything else is in an state of absolute stillness.
If it would be possible to access a colder degree - then the elemental particles would not be able to be bound together.
And the system would experience a total collapse.

Don't know if anything have changed yet.
If it hasn't, one would have to find a way to "bind" the particles together without vibration-energy, to reach a lower temperature.
This would probably not be too easy.

DaddyHoggy wrote:

Switeck wrote:

Alex wrote:

p.s. I bet the first faster than light travel is an accident by someone mucking around in their garage and has no idea of the physics.

The first successful "cold fusion" experiment (if it's even remotely possible) might involve a lot of electron quantum tunneling where they at least defy the normal speed laws of the universe.

We don't mind this kind of thing going on at a quantum level

Because it's not useful and/or not understood?

Sort of like y = 1/x ...just ignore what happens when x = 0.

I have to concur with Greenseng, absolute zero is indeed the lowest possible temperature without having the entire system fall apart.

But then, there COULD be something we're overlooking. Remember how long scientists were convinced of Boer's Model of the Atom (and they had the mathematical backing)? Granted, astrophysical theories are much harder to disprove, but you never know.

In terms of Oolite, hyperspeed travel is not necessarily too unrealistic. Again, the speed of light limitation relates to the fact that, beyond the speed of light, matter becomes energy. But, in the Ooniverse, they've found a way to "control the bend" and create wormholes, so they've probably found a way to keep the energy in proper form and make it survivable by the pilot, so that everything turns back into matter exactly as it should.

Boy, that makes a new weapon possibility, doesn't it? An energy displacer.

I think the basic premise for this thread (if I may return to it for a moment after all the derailings and deviations ) is ignoring the most important fact: It's a game, and we don't particularly care about RealLife™-physics. The game has to work as a game. Period. Therefore the initial assumption that only physics is preventing us from making big ships faster is faulty. Therefore also the following assumption that some "new" physics theory would allow us to make them faster is wrong. We are not bound by any physics theory, we are bound by what works in the game, and what makes the game work.

Super fast big ships make the game fall apart, and that's the reason why they don't exist in the core set (apart from inheritance from Elite, of course). And the core ships set the standard for OXP ships. Super fast OXP ships which are outclassing the core ships in every aspect would again make the game fall apart.

If on the other hand a ship OXP designer decides not to care about the balance of the game, nobody and nothing can prevent him or her from doing so. He or she is free to do so. And then the players will decide whether it's an enhancement or a disturbance of the game for them.

Thank you, Commander McLane. Even though we don't agree on whether or not it throws off the game balance, we agree that it is ultimately up to the player.

Dragonfire wrote:

Thank you, Commander McLane. Even though we don't agree on whether or not it throws off the game balance, we agree that it is ultimately up to the player.

True but it puts a lot of onus on the mission writer to think of a scenario that has a minimum entry point in terms of ship capability but that won't break/be pointless for an ubership player. Or, then again, the mission writer could just caveat his OXP with something along the lines of "there's no point in playing this mission if you're going to fly a Caddy/Wyvern/etc, it's not aimed at you."

Commander McLane wrote:

I think the basic premise for this thread (if I may return to it for a moment after all the derailings and deviations ) is ignoring the most important fact: It's a game, and we don't particularly care about RealLife™-physics. The game has to work as a game. Period. Therefore the initial assumption that only physics is preventing us from making big ships faster is faulty. Therefore also the following assumption that some "new" physics theory would allow us to make them faster is wrong. We are not bound by any physics theory, we are bound by what works in the game, and what makes the game work.

Super fast big ships make the game fall apart, and that's the reason why they don't exist in the core set (apart from inheritance from Elite, of course). And the core ships set the standard for OXP ships. Super fast OXP ships which are outclassing the core ships in every aspect would again make the game fall apart.

If on the other hand a ship OXP designer decides not to care about the balance of the game, nobody and nothing can prevent him or her from doing so. He or she is free to do so. And then the players will decide whether it's an enhancement or a disturbance of the game for them.

Couldn't agree more Cmdr McLane,
Tis a game, with game physics.
Anyone can make their own to fit their own idea of an Ooniverse.
Let's keep the core game for fun and let adjustments be oxps.

I'd hate to loose the actual game again.
Though must admit, would hate the loss of oxps too.

What a game.

Well, on that topic, I am going to take an extra five and make a more standard Wyvern, too. The main cool features are the weapons and the superb recharge rate. So, that way, there's still something to work with most missions.

@DaddyHoggy: Good idea. Disclaimers always work.