Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.54141546 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Spaceship thread 2:Electric Boogaloo

>> No.54141552

old thread
>>54095554

>> No.54141581

>> No.54141586

>>54141546
Requesting carriers/hiveships/motherships/droneships.

>> No.54141647

>>54141586

>> No.54141693

What is a best kind of FTL?

1) No FTL. Regular speeds. Travel is either limited to a few close-lying solar systems, or the crew spends centuries in hybernation.
2) No FTL. Sub-lightspeed accessible. Range is large, crew doesn't hybernate due to relativistic effects.
3) Straight-up FTL. The "fuck Einstein" variety.
4) Hyperspace/Warp/Null-space. Another dimension where ship still flies.
6) Instantaineous jump. May still involve hyperspace, but anyway the ship effectively just teleports.
7) Portals/wormholes/stargates. Self-explanatory. Doesn't matter if natural or artificial, permanent or temporary.

>> No.54141708

>> No.54141737

>>54141693
Hyperspace is the worst, because it can't physically exist in our universe.

Alcubierre drives are alright.
Wormholes a best, because they are realistic and avoid most timetravel and WMD problems.

Instantaneous wormhole-based teleport drives aren't realistic, but they're a fair alternative to Alcubierre drives that remove the planet-ramming problem.

>> No.54141747

>>54141586

>> No.54141804

>>54141737
Planet-ramming problem?

>> No.54141809

>>54141693
It depends on the story, really. Each one produces a different shape of society and a different shape of narrative. Sometimes I'm in the mood for Star Wars and sometimes I'm in the mood for Revelation Space, you know?

>> No.54141818

>>54141693
>No FTL. Sub-lightspeed accessible

Stop right there.

Once you cross that line, you have to acknowledge that any FTL is time travel so you can arrive at your destination before the light of an certain event and hence violate causality.

Sub-lightspeeds are cool and accesible with Pulsed nuclear engines either Orion drives or inertial confinement fusion, 30% the speed of light is not out the realm of possibility.

The problem starts when you realize that 30% speed of light is pretty much a relativistic kill vehicle, so the dynamics of war change a lot now, even inside a solar system we pretty much will see the equivalent of nukes and maybe small tactical relativistic kill vehicles to just create a few dozen miles in depth crater inside a planet as a bridgehead.

>> No.54141902

>> No.54141980

>>54141693
>hard
No FTL, unless it's bleeding edge, poorly understood, and is treated as a big deal in-setting.
>(((hard)))
Wormhole generators. Hard enough to keep the autists satisfied, but soft enough that you can have your star-hopping adventure.
>soft/space fantasy
Plothole space, especially of the Grossly Incandescent Space Hell variety. Space fantasy only: drive failures don't cause the ship to evaporate, but instead results in demonic incursion, giving players the opportunity to rip and tear.

>>54141804
You know how an asteroid can fuck up a planet? Take that asteroid, and speed it up to FTL. If you don't strictly NEED that planet, then it's the be-all-end-all of siege warfare.

>> No.54142004

>> No.54142012

>>54141804
E = mc^2 makes fast spaceships relativistic kinetic kill vehicles.

>> No.54142016

>> No.54142021

>>54141737
Unfortunately no, wormholes still violate causality if it allows for FTL.

All FTL options violate causality, period. As soon as you add a third observer who is travelling towards or away from the ship(s), it all falls apart.

There's no magic bullet around it, aside from saying that the science is wrong and inventing your own science-fantasy interpretation.

>> No.54142033

>> No.54142056

>>54142021
>Unfortunately no, wormholes still violate causality if it allows for FTL.

Yes, they do, but you can ignore that for most practical purposes by postulating a wormhole network that considers itself a universal frame of reference and avoids the easy exploits around this by Visser radiation handwaves.

>> No.54142077

>>54142012
Does that even work with the Alcubierre Drive, since the whole trick of it is that the ship is not moving at relativistic speeds, just the space-time bubble around it?

>> No.54142083

>> No.54142088

>> No.54142100

>> No.54142114

>> No.54142125

I really like Hyperspace and stargate/portal options, but then again I don't play hard scifi so realistic physics of space travel doesn't matter to me. Currently i'm waiting and stealing all these images for when Starfinder releases.

In that they use something called the Drift, a hyperspace style FTL that was created by a tech god, who is the fusion of three different technology gods (clockwork god, android god, and AI god). Whenever you use the Drift, you sometimes pull chunks of the surrounding plane into the Drift, and you can use it to get to and from other dimensions too. Which means you can be flying to a nearby star system to pick up cargo and get waylaid by an encounter with angels trying to get home, or demons stalking the flight lines between stars, or other more stranger things.

>> No.54142137

>> No.54142158

>>54142077
At >c velocities, the interface fills the bubble with amazingly excessive amounts of radiation inside and out. So if we're really using a 'hard' setting, Alcubierre drives can't approach c without self-destructing.

>> No.54142168

>> No.54142178

>>54142021
>aside from saying that the science is wrong
Except that's 100% certain.

We *KNOW* that the relativity-based model of physics is not comprehensively correct, just a useful approximation in most cases, the way Newtonian physics was before it.

The fact that we have a model of physics that depends on entirely unobserved theoretical "dark matter" and "dark energy" making up the majority of the universe in order for its preconditions to hold together at an interstellar scale means we are wrong about something fundamental.

>> No.54142208

>> No.54142220

>>54141980
>Plothole space, especially of the Grossly Incandescent Space Hell variety. Space fantasy only: drive failures don't cause the ship to evaporate, but instead results in demonic incursion, giving players the opportunity to rip and tear.


Now this I like. Perfect for an intro adventure to the campaign. Especially if it was all only known by the higher eschelon and a few scientists and hidden from general knowledge as possible conspiracy theoretics or crazy talk from religious fanatics.

>> No.54142241

>> No.54142358

>>54142178
>a model of physics that depends on entirely unobserved theoretical [...]
Reminder that the existence of antimatter was predicted by one guy being really autistic and insisting that his formula for 4d quantum wave propagation had to look pretty. I'll buy that there's some weird invisible shit until we have a better theory out there.

>>54142220
It's also great for (in works leaning more towards fantasy than space) having some space crusades, where people have the actual, physical backing of the forces they champion. Even in the less fantastic form, you could have certain favored groups just "happening" to find the most efficient paths for jump and have fewer drive failures, and all the theological arguing that ensues.

>> No.54142680

>>54141980
>>54142220
>>54142358
I have occasionally toyed around with the idea of psychic powers being caused by hyperspace travel (although not going full 40k with it) to explain why there are people running around with blatantly obvious psychic powers when there was no such people back when humanity was confined to Earth. Potentially also use it to explain why none of the inevitable ancient, hyper-advanced aliens are around anymore- they kept using hyperdrive, so they kept getting more and more psychic until they ascended to a higher plane of existence.

>> No.54142969

>> No.54143227

>>54142178
Dark matter's been observed as well as something that only interacts gravitationally can be. It's quite a sure thing (though the details are less so).

Dark energy's definitely still on the "the fuck?" side of physics, though.

>> No.54143432

>>54141693
no FTL with relativistic effects
Realistic, and for realm building. Each world is completely isolated culturally/technologically from others. Allows for interesting war aspect, as anyone with an "interstellar ship" can hold a planet hostage, and easily kill those fuckers that pissed your great grandfather off. Limited galactic options though, as why would you follow any type of centralized authority. Any reps your planet sends will arrive after you die, why would your grandchildren trust some old fuck who disapeared for a hundred years or so to represent you. Communication as well, taking only slightly faster than you can physically go there (Ender series had a mumbo jumbo solution that worked somewhat). All in all, best setting for books. Potentially games as well. Some ancient civ or some other mcguffen spread over multiple planets. Each very unique, have a water world, desert world(THE SPICE MUST FLOW), world with all cyborgs, world with no tech, world with monarchy, world with mega corps, ect. the possibilities are endless. Literally the best adventure game, and should players die, new people can be recruited creating a diverse party with very different backgrounds(Farscape).

>> No.54143598

>>54141586

>> No.54143604

>> No.54143653

How well would WW2 naval combat translate to space combat? What would have to change to make things work?

>> No.54143783

>>54143653
Removing the 3rd dimension.
1. increase range to such an extent you will hardly ever fight over 2 vectors(LOGH).
2. location fiat, battles in areas with very limited navigable space
3. gentlemens agreements(lol)
4. make it only a board game(BFG looking at you kid)
5. humans shake their perception terribly, all aligning up in the same axis when in formation, and then attacking together in such a fashion(Battle Room in Enders Game)
6. dont explain it, just do it, justify it with fun, ease of rules, ect

Its very hard to justify 2d, in the most 3d environment you can have, when you are not making a game. Games only depict it this way as it becomes exponentially more complex to accurately use 3d in anything more than 1 ship, 1st or 3rd person games. Controlling more than 1 ship in a 3d space would give people headaches.

>> No.54143812

>> No.54143850

>> No.54143882

>> No.54143909

>> No.54143941

>>54143783
The 3rd dimension really isn't that significant in space combat anyway, on account of the ecliptic plane and the importance of gravity slingshotting for getting around star systems.

Attacking from above or below would take such an enormous expenditure of fuel that it would likely mean the attacking ships would be very poorly armed and armored for their size compared to the defenders around whatever planet or asteroid base was being attacked.

>> No.54144058

>> No.54144088

>>54143653
BDs have been out for ages. Stop using those disgusting looking camrip webms.

>> No.54144103

>> No.54144831

>>54144103

God I fucking love battletech ships. Mind posting more pics anon?

>> No.54144842

>>54141737
>remove the planet-ramming problem.

But that's half the fun.

>> No.54144884

>>54144842
What you want to do is go full Lensman and start ramming planets into things.

>> No.54144900

>> No.54144907

>> No.54144917

>> No.54144921

>> No.54144924

>> No.54144932

>> No.54144935

>> No.54144942

>> No.54144948

>> No.54144957

>> No.54144967

>> No.54144974

>> No.54144986

>> No.54144988

>> No.54144998

>> No.54145002

>> No.54145009

>> No.54145017

>> No.54145030

>> No.54145035

>> No.54145047

>> No.54145058

>> No.54145062

>> No.54145069

>> No.54145079

>> No.54145105

>>54144088
Rogue One has many flaws but the space battle over Scarif sure as hell wasn't one of them.

>> No.54145242

>>54145105

>> No.54145249

>> No.54145308

>>54145249
That was such an amazing scene where Vader's ship jumps in and wrecks the rebels.

They really fucked up the music though. Needed some bombastic Imperial March variant instead of the quiet soundtrack they used.

>> No.54145706

>>54145249
why do the rebels always send in those pumpkin/football shaped transports into battle?

>> No.54145730

>>54145706
because it obviously was a trap

>> No.54145733

>>54142021
>Unfortunately no, wormholes still violate causality if it allows for FTL.
>All FTL options violate causality, period. As soon as you add a third observer who is travelling towards or away from the ship(s), it all falls apart.
But what if the third observer can't observe? As in, he can't see what's going on inside the wormhole/bridge. To him it just looks like someone disappear, then reappear somewhere else.

>> No.54145752

>>54145706
because they're fast and relatively well armed, and beggers can't be choosers

>> No.54146023

>>54145752
I'm talking about the transports no the frog face cruisers.

>> No.54146476

>> No.54146485

>>54142016
That's much better than the other one which had a huge bar on only one side of the ship. Looks kind of cool, but would completely throw off the center of mass. Oh, there it is. >>54142088

>> No.54146888

>>54142077
I imagine getting hit by a bubble of spacetime moving faster than the speed of light would hurt a lot, even if the ship inside "Wasn't actually moving at all"

>> No.54146976

>>54143941
While leaving the ecliptic is hard, it's not that difficult to enter an inclined or even retrograde orbit around a planet or moon, you only need to make a very small adjustment to the angle you approach it, and suddenly you'll be coming in at an angle.

Interplanetary space is more or less 2d, but in orbit, threat vectors are a complete hemisphere, with the Horizon being the most dangerous (anything could pop up out of it) and the space "above" you being something to keep an eye on as well.

>> No.54147081

>>54142178
We aren't wrong about relativistic effects and causality breaking of > c, period. We can be wrong about a lot of things, and have newer models, but the truth of relativistic effects and causality breaking is an universal truth.

You are arguing that gravity doesn't necessarily exist because we haven't the most perfect theory possible for it. This isn't how it works. Yes, we can find ulterior development and affine our understanding of gravity. This doesn't mean that gravity doesn't exist, or that we will suddenly find a theory that say that gravity doesn't exist. Gravity exists kiddo. You are not failing out of the earth because it exists.

We see gravity. We experience gravity. We know gravity exists. Our understanding of the universe makes gravity obvious. Our understanding of it can be flawed, but gravity won't suddenly disappear in a puff of logic because a new theory appears.

Same thing with relativistic effect and the causality breaking effects of speed superior to c. We know, for a fact, that they exist. We can certainly create new theories, affine our models, call it something else, say that it is caused by something else, prove it is only an aftereffect of some quantum gravity theory. But relativistic effects won't suddenly disappear in a puff of logic. They exist.

>> No.54147825

>>54141737
>can't physically exist in our universe
>IN our universe
that's the whole point of hyperspace. it ain't IN our universe at all!

>> No.54147865

>>54143432
>Limited galactic options though, as why would you follow any type of centralized authority.
Ender's universe solved it by having the government control the ansibles, so the colonies have a choice to either comply or be cut off from the rest of humanity at least for several generations

>> No.54147904

>>54141818
>violate causality
I fully admit I don't understand quantum mechanics, but still, this idea that outrunning a particle can constitute "violation of causality" sounds like violation of common sense. Same as "if you move in circles around a space string you can go back in time", which even scientists admit is obviously impossible and likely will be proven to be a mistake by future discoveries.

Even if it IS true, it is the kind of scientific thing that should be disregarded first and foremost, when making allowances to accommodate your sci-fi.

>> No.54149521

>my science fantasy setting
>ships getting remass through siphoning shit from subdimensions via magic like some sort of eldritch bussard collector + ultra efficient monopole based conversion drive = warships can be extremely heavily armoured
>plasma screens magnetically suspended kilometres from the ship and heated to act as a sort of regenerating super-Whipple shield that also effects (most) types of lasers and particle beams
>full body phased arrays and banks of sandblaster railguns and swarms of (sometimes nuclear) micro-missiles for active point defence

Is this cool? My problem is that these ships need to have extremely powerful drives (almost light-hugging) because FTL isnt readily available for style reasons so they have shitloads of firepower by definition but I also don't want combat to be instant knock out he-who-hits-first wins, but I also don't want to introduce perfect sci-fi energy fields into the setting.

>> No.54149532

>>54141546
That looks like a good ship for a (((merchant))) republic.

>> No.54149535

>>54146888
>in the far future...
>warfare is reduced to deadly bumping car battles but with FTL spaceships
>making every battle outcome a simple matter of what ships have the better AI controlling it

>> No.54149552

>>54147904
You're outrunning the information speed cap of the universe. Light simply happens to travel at that speed because it is the fastest speed that can be traveled.

I don't get why FTL users don't like the consequences. FTL is a perfect plot device, it gives god-like power to the first jackass who gets their hands on it and does a little basic engineering.

>> No.54149561

I need realistic spaceships, my bros.
Give me all your ugly ass, spinning-shit-around-an-axis kind of ships, please.

>> No.54149624

>>54149561
How realistic are we talking here, only 100% hard actual workable irl designs? Or just a general aesthetic of realism?

>> No.54149631

>>54149624
Id love to post a passage or 2 from the book of this guy in action but I don't have a copy on this pc.

>> No.54149641

>>54149631
This one is a little fighter drone iirc.

>> No.54149650

>>54149641

>> No.54149658

>>54149650

>> No.54149672

>>54149658

>> No.54149679

>>54149672
getting into less realistic territory here

>> No.54149689

>>54149624
100% real lyff shit that needs zero handwaving to work out only
I'm working on a realistic approach to hard sci-fi, no shenanigans kind of space opera setting that focus more on the radical societal changes that high technology and interstellar travel brings us.

>> No.54149700

>>54149689
Good luck bruh, I don't have much that fits that description other than some of what ive already posted. Whats the summary of your setting?

>> No.54149727

Apologies for breaking up the hard sci-fi discussion, but I have come here to announce that hammerhead-design starships are officially the most boner-inducing designs of them all.

>> No.54149752

>> No.54149770

>>54149752
Isnt the death star bigger than this?

>> No.54150089

>>54149700
It's a setting where humanity has managed to colonize different star systems but they are physically isolated because no FTL.
>Internet is highly advanced, allowing people to practically live in a virtual world and normally interact with people from anywhere, using advanced artificial reality. Imagine Matrix but populated by people from different planets and star systems.
>Planet dwelling humans develop radically different cultures. Some are individualist and live in an extremely advanced society and spend their lives mostly in the web being cared by robots and indulging themselves.
>There is trade going on between star systems (rich people from some places like to buy stuff brought from other star systems simply because they can), but since the ship and crew frequently spends decades travelling from system to system, they have developed their own kinda tribalistic culture (they can't properly connect into the web from a ship that is traveling at fucking fast speeds from one system to another, so they only interact with other people who live on their ship and the numerous androids and AIs that also populate it) which is relatively similar to the long extinct old Earth culture (more exactly: pre galactic-war Earth. Life on Earth doesn't exist anymore btw - we managed to fuck that up beyond repair). They still use relatively ancient technology and are treated as living dinosaurs ( which they are, actually, since your average starfarer have lived for centuries with the help of cryogenic sleep ) whenever they interact with system dwelling folk.
>Of course you could leave the business of sending shit from one star to another to unmanned ships, but that doesn't happen because there are outcast people living in the asteroid belt borders of star systems who frequently attack ships that are coming and going and theres also an old pact forbidding AIs & robots from killing people, meaning starships need humans aboard to defend it from the other bad humans.

>> No.54150102

>>54149770
The death star it's supposed the be the size of a moon, so of course it's going be way bigger.

>> No.54150155

>>54150089
>Internet is highly advanced, allowing people to practically live in a virtual world and normally interact with people from anywhere

But it would still suffer lightspeed lag, imagine the ping you would get.

>> No.54150397

>> No.54150431

>> No.54151717

>>54143653
Physics to start, carrier based aircraft don't translate to space.

Submarine warfare however, now there's a space analogue

>> No.54151792

>>54151717
Submarines have stealth tho. Trench warfare is best analogy.

>> No.54152440

>>54150155
FTL communications are more on the realm of possibility, though. We already have a very good idea of how it works in paper, we just don't have the technology, yet.

>> No.54152448

>>54151792
Please develop anon because I can't see how this make any sense

>> No.54152823

>>54149552
>You're outrunning the information speed cap of the universe.

Thats something I never get.

I understand that light, and therefore matter can't go faster than c, but what I don't understand is why information is too.

Information doesn't seem to even be a physical thing or even a physical property.

>> No.54152850

>>54149752
Where is that ship in Star Wars fluff? The Eclipse was supposed to be the largest (but slightly shorter than the Executor) ship in the fiction pre-Disney.

>> No.54152872

>>54152448
You know where your enemy is, they know where you are, and any attempt for one of you to move to the other one will be met with too much firepower along your trajectory.

So instead we bury deep in our planets and hurl missles, rkes, etc at one another until some is dead or concedes

>> No.54152910

>>54141586
Have the best, anon.

>> No.54152922

>>54152448
Two heavily fortified defensive lines separated by a giant killing field with no easy way to cross it.

>> No.54152951

>> No.54152952

>>54152850
I'ts a jest ship mocking the ever enlarging star destroyers from the expanded universe anon.

>> No.54152975

>> No.54153003

>>54152823
Do you understand relativity? C is constant in every reference frame.

>> No.54153016

>>54152823
It's just how the universe works.

Why do apples fall down? Gravity. Why gravity? It's just how the universe works. There is no reason. Just one of the fundamental rules of the universe. God could have chosen that mass repels mass instead, or that mass has no bearing on other mass. He chose gravity. It's completely arbitrary. There is no reason for it. It's just how everything... well, everything is.

Same thing for the information cap of the universe (or relativity). God could have chosen to give no information cap. There is one. It's just how the universe works. Why? Because it's just how it is.

We know it's how the universe work. We know it really, really, really well. All modern physic is based on it. It has been proven in ten thousand experiments. Why? Well, why not?

You have issues grasping relativity because you don't experience it every day. You experience gravity every day. You have no issues with apple failing down (but why are they failing down? There is literally no reason for it). As you don't understand this very fundamental law of the universe every day, it seems just crazy to you.

>> No.54153098

>>54153016
>>54153003

Is not that I don't get that C is the limit for everything, just that information having no physical properties at all and just being knowledge have to be limited by the same equation of mass and energy.

>> No.54153111

>>54152823
>>54153016
It's technically untrue that there's an information speed limit, but the only way to break it (as far as we know) is with quantum entanglement, which opens up a whole new layer of weird shit. Hope you like retroactive suspension of self-interference (or really self-interference generally).

>> No.54153179

>>54153098
Information is tied to time.

Your information can't travel faster than time, because information is literally the exchange of something in regard to time.

Things that goes quickly constitute their own space time, detached from the universe and everything else. In fact, EVERYTHING that has not your exact speed and your exact place is detached from you, but you synchronize with it at the speed of c.

The speed of c being very, very large, you don't see that when you take a jog. There is a lag between your personal space time and, let's say, the earth space time (light cone) when you take a jog, but this lag is so minuscule you never actually experience it.

When you travel very, very fast, your personal space time get very, very desynchronized with the rest of... well, everything. That's why time slow down.

When you travel faster than c, you travel faster than every possible space time. You desynchronise with the rest of everything. You time travel.

>> No.54153182

>>54152952
I love Star Destroyers enough to ignore the flaws.

>> No.54153214

>>54153182
What's going on with that ship right by the Eclipse's engines? Is it just two Star Destroyers stacked on top of each other?

>> No.54153232

>>54153214
Didn't notice at first, maybe an accident on the artist's part? Has no label.

>> No.54153262

>>54153111
Quantum entanglement can't be used to transmit information. Not without bullshit magic.

The math is very, very clear. You can't transmit information using quantum entanglement.

There is a sort of action at a distance when the wave function collapse, sure, something, but again it can't be used to transmit information. Not without some bullshit science fiction theorem.

Good for a sf setting, though. IIRC EVE uses quantum entanglement (+bullshit magical maths) for his faster than light communication.

>> No.54153283

>>54153182
You know you have a fucked up scale when you dwarf 40k vessels. THe nomenclature n Star wars is over the place too, they are too fucking big in general for my taste, but I love them anyway. Fractal does wonders with them.

>> No.54153349

>>54153214
That's an Annihilator-class. It is two Star Destroyers stacked on top of each other.

>> No.54153380

>>54153283
>You know you have a fucked up scale when you dwarf 40k vessels.
Nah. I'd say Star Wars is one of the only series ever to get scale right considering the industrial output of a galaxy-spanning civilization.

>> No.54153416

>>54153182
Someone should put a GSV on it.

>> No.54153432

>>54143227
It's been observed just as well as the Victorian aether. They knew light was a wave, and waves had to propagate through a medium, and so they knew the aether had to exist.
We know how gravity works and that there is more of it than there should be for the observable universe, so we know that dark matter that only affects gravity exists.

Just because it has to exist to fit within our current knowledge and theories doesn't mean it does or we're correct.

>> No.54153490

>>54153432
> and waves had to propagate through a medium,

What?

Did no one thought about making a void in a cristal jar and see if light could go through or not?

>> No.54153535

>>54153349
The EU is such a silly place.

>> No.54153541

>>54153490
The whole point of the aether was that it was an immaterial medium through which light propagates. It isn't air and you can't expel it from a jar with a vacuum pump.

>> No.54153666

>>54153490
The thought was such:

Every wave propagate through something.

Light is obviously a wave (sic).

Light propagates through something.

If we can't detect that something, it just means it's something subtle enough, and pervasive enough, and invisible enough, that we can't detect.

Pretty logical conclusions. Honestly, the aether is a logical theory, one thought by the best minds of their centuries.

>> No.54153705

>>54146023
Presumably they have a lot of shit on them that they want to take with, and they might contain forces if there's a ground battle expected - the rebels have to be mobile, I assume they don't have THAT many bases to pick from, so they bring their equivalent of a baggage train with them.

>> No.54153732

>>54153283
At least the don't have eagle statues with 10 mile wingspans or 15 mile long skulls.

>> No.54153837

>>54152872
That makes a lot of sense. I'm stealing this

>> No.54154006

>>54153837
It does allow for a lot of cool motifs to be translated.

Would above/below the elliptic make sense for an equivalent to the aerial dimension of the trenches?

Manoeuvre time and weapons load would be seriously limited (as anon above mentioned, flying outside it means you have to use a lot more fuel), but you get a new angle of recon and attack.

Whoever can invent a ship tough enough to weather the "gap" gets tanks in space.

>> No.54154091

>>54144088
this is awesome
I might even finally watch Star Wars for the first time. maybe.

>> No.54154289

Why doesn't anyone post BIG ships?

>> No.54154311

>>54153179
hm, what's interesting, I knew all that, but never got it
you told me nothing new, but somehow put it all in perspective
now i get it

>> No.54154338

>>54154289
>Structure

>The physical hull of a Plate was over 50 km. long and 20 km. wide, with a height of 4 km.

>The top kilometre was the accommodation section for biological passengers. The flat portions of the top area have a combined surface area of 800 km2.

>The middle two kilometres were docks and construction yards for spacecraft.

>The lower kilometre was engineering space, primarily for engines.

>With an external multiple-layer field-complex could reach 90 to 100 km.

>One example had a operational mass of about six trillion tonnes.

>> No.54154390

>>54153179
>>54141818
>>54142021

I think you get it wrong.
Relativistic effects apply when moving. FTL movement breaks causality. No arguing here.
Key word here is MOVEMENT. Something that can have speed.

If you travel through hyperspace, do a null-space jump (i.e. tha kind of hyperspace where distance does not exist and you simply disappear in one place and appear in another) or using a wormhole you do not MOVE faster-than-light. You just stand still or move at regular speed and then just so happen to disappear at one place and appear at another. You do not move fast enough to cause any noticeable relativistic effect.

>> No.54154435

>>54152910

>Early edition battlestar

My dick.

>> No.54154541

>>54154390
You are teleporting from space time A to space time B.

No matter if you are physically travelling, if you experience acceleration, or some shit. No matter if you use Alcubierre drives or wormholes. You are instantly teleporting from space time A to space time B.

The information speed cap of the universe is c. If you are teleporting from space time A to space time B, ignoring the information speed cap (and that's exactly what superluminal speed means), you are literally travelling through time.

If you go from A to B, and then go to A again, you will travel in the past. That's a perfectly understood consequence of relativity. It's just how it works.

Using any mean, any way of superluminal travel is travelling through time, by the very definition of what is time, and how the universe synchronizes differing space times together. Sorry. That's just how it is.

>> No.54154603

>>54154541
Time is a social construct anon

>> No.54154692

>>54154541
Then it isn't me that arrives at point B. It something absolutely identical. Me at point A just ceases to exist.

Point is, nothing in real universe, not even information, travels in the process. Object disappears at point A, same or identical (the difference is purely academic) appears at point B. It is about as plausible as existence of wormholes or hypespace.

Plus, if we allow existence of hyperspace, and possiblity of matter crossing from it to realspace, the causality simply cannot apply in this case.
Say, we are at point Ar in realspace. We cross over to hyperspace, to point Ah. Then we travel through hyperspace to point Bh, which takes us an hour. Point Bh corresponds to point Br in realspace. Will causality somehow stop our spaceship cold in the wormhole between Bh and Br?


Point is. Everything about relativistics and causality revolves around bog-simple MOVEMENT. Them moment we take actual MOVEMENT out of equation the problem disappears. Relativistic laws have no exception for that because hyperspace or wormholes simply don't exist.

Note that I don't argue that any other forms of FTL - Alcubierre drives, space snarling, intertia absroption, etc - still violate causality.

>> No.54154703

>>54154541
>you will travel in the past.
Say it takes me 5 minutes to travel to the Sun.
I'm going faster than light, but it still took time.
If I go back to earth, I'm not going backwards in time.
It still took 10 minutes.
I won't experience 10 minutes, that's a given, but I'm still not going backwards in time

>> No.54154729

>>54153283
Only the Super Star Destroyers exceed 40k vessels, the Imperial II is outmatched by most Imperium ships sadly.

>> No.54154738

>>54154703
your personal time will go back in time.
If you travel a lightyear at 0.99c, you'll experience, say, a minute.
If you travel a lightyear at 1c, you will feel that you arrived from A to B instantaneously.
If you travel a lightyear at 1.01c, you won't remember yourself pressing the START button.

>> No.54154842

>>54154703
You are assuming that every space time of the universe are the same. You are assuming that the space time (the real term is light cone, but whatever) of the sun is the same space time of the earth.

That is not true.

The sun has its own space time. The earth has his its space time. They aren't moving in the same direction, at the same time, at the same place. They both have their personal time, and they both synchronize their personal time through the information speed cap c.

There is no divine, objective time. The sun has its space time. The earth has its own space time.

If you teleport from the earth space time to the sun space time, you are being faster than the synchronizing speed of them both. You are time travelling. If you teleport back to earth, you will go back before you started your journey.

Again, that's just how the universe works anon. It's incredible, it's mind-blowing, but the maths of special relativity can be understood by 13 years old. It's just than nobody thought of breaking universal time before Einstein.

>> No.54155047

>>54154692
Instead of visualizing points being in a absolute time, visualize points synchronizing their own time through the information speed cap.

There is no sea of absolute time. It is 8 PM here on earth, but on the sun? That question is incredibly complex. The sun share its space time with us through the information speed cap c.

If you want to go faster than c, you will time travel. It's 8 PM on earth. You teleport. It's 8 PM on the sun. Fun fact: 8 PM on earth and 8 PM on the sun DON'T mean the same thing. 8 PM on the sun really mean 7:53 PM on earth. The space times aren't synchronized yet. You teleported faster than c, remember?

If you teleport back to earth, congratulation, it's 7:46 PM. You arrived before you started.

>> No.54155058

>>54145733
This is why the observer paradox is nonsense. Unless entering/exiting FTL creates light shows the size of Olympus Mons, the light just isn't going to be detectable over interplanetary scales unless you know exactly when and where to look with some very large telescopes. At interstellar range it would have to be planet sized flashes of energy. People getting so hyped up over this stuff don't take the experimental astronomy side of things into account. The only real FTL time travel shenanigans possible is Picard Maneuver microjumps to gang up on an enemy.

>> No.54155137

>>54147825
The point of science fiction is fantasy to cater to nerds, not the average retard.

So yes, we want realism factors there so we can wank our intellectual goop on it.

>> No.54155163

>>54153262
The math is nonsense. It assumes locality and then says that non-local FTL communication doesn't work thanks to some linear algebra handwaving about subspaces.

WOW
O
W

The only thing we're missing for FTL comms is persistent entanglement that lasts over an arbitrary number of measurements. I've yet to see the math that proves persistent entanglement is impossible.

>> No.54155278

>>54153535
>>54153349
>Hans this time... maybe we went too far
>Well we sure won't get far with only two engines and one body so...

>> No.54155285

post bioships

>> No.54155318

>>54154390
you are here
now you are over there

You have traveled, you have moved relative to my frame of reference; the method used doesn't matter.

>> No.54155340

>>54155163
For fuck sake mate.

I'm drunk. I'm in no position to talk seriously about this shit.

Okay. Point A:

Persistent entanglement is maybe possible. See space time crystal and quantum topological order.

Point B:

Fuck you. It doesn't prove anything. Quantum entanglement can't transmit information. It would violate causality, special relativity, and permit information travel and nonsense like that. Just ain't possible fucking mate. Don't be ridiculous.

>> No.54155390

>>54141693
No 5?

Anyway:
6 > 7 > 4 > 3 > 2 > 1

>> No.54155499

>>54155390
5 is unscientific

>> No.54155656

>>54154289
>my dreadnaught is a big brown horse cock
>your argument is invalid

>> No.54156031

>>54155340
>It would violate causality, special relativity,
So
If it violates these theories then they are wrong or incomplete and new theories will need to be developed
All science is is what we can observe, infer, and reproduce from our limited perspective
I fully expect our knowledge of universal "Laws" to be obsolete within 200 years

>> No.54156224

We've been arguing about this too long without posting spaceships.

>> No.54156252

>> No.54156354

Do fantasy spaceships qualify? Because I need fantasy spaceship images.

>> No.54156401

>>54146023
I figured it was so they can board ships during the battle, those transports are loaded with marines, or perhaps repair crews so that they can keep their ships in the fight for longer.

>> No.54156422

On the subject of hyperspace methods, I'm somewhat fond of at-light teleportation. However, I've only seen it done in three places.

>> No.54156424

>> No.54156436

>>54156424
What anime is that.

>> No.54156465

I'm too dumb to get the 'ftl violates causality/universal information speed limit' arguments, something seems wrong and I can't exactly put words to it

someone mind explaining like you're talking to a five year old pretty please?

>> No.54156473

>>54156436
Sizzle reel from Star Citizen. It's pretty to look at but you ain't touching it for awhile.

>> No.54156477

>>54149561
Okie-dokie.

>> No.54156715

>>54141693
Warp Drives that move you X times faster than c then once you get wherever your going you set up a Stargate/wormhole generator to connect to one back home

>> No.54156839

>>54156477

>> No.54156885

>>54156473
>never ever

>> No.54157513

>>54153432
That's not a fair analogy. The aether didn't have any supporting evidence; it was always supposition and generalization from analogous systems. We do have actual observations of gravity effects without anything in the EM that would be seen from conventional substances. Maybe that's because there's an extra six terms in the theory of universal gravitation that we've been ignoring, but it doesn't really matter: evidence for the phenomenon actually exists, unlike for the aether.

>> No.54158173

>>54157513
Evidence did exist at the time. They knew that light was passing through space. They knew light was a wave. They knew waves needed to propagate through a medium. Ergo they theorized some mysterious substance they couldn't see or interact with to fit their theory for light to travel through.
We know galaxies have more gravity than they should. We know that mass seems to create gravity. So we theorized a mysterious substance that we cannot see or interact with to fit our theory and to create the gravity.

Their evidence was light being a wave and yet passing through vacuum, hence aether.
Our evidence is gravity being where there is no visible mass to support it, hence dark matter.
Both were/are great theories for the evidence present at the time, and I'm not a scientist, but I'd bet good money dark matter will go the way of the aether. Probably some bias from being an engineer who prefers science with data instead of predictions.

>> No.54159267

>> No.54159533

>>54144088
This is so stupid

Why and how does the big ship slice through the other big ship if the little ship is the one supplying all the energy? Why doesn't the little ship slice through the big ship then?

I could've believed it if they connected with about the same force as the little ship supplied, but they basically turned the big ships into soggy paper mache

dumb as fuck

>> No.54159605

>>54155340
Entanglement NOW can't transmit information, because the entanglement breaks after taking measurements of the entangled objects, but persistent entanglement that doesn't disappear after a measurement is taken COULD. Take persistent entanglement as a given and the rest is basically down to protocol design and hardware engineering problems. I suspect the L2 protocol will end up being Ethernet with jumbo frames for backwards compatibility reasons.

>>54156465
The basic gist of it is that causality itself propagates at the speed of light - reality has a draw distance. FTL makes physics weenies with no imagination sperg out because it implies that shit can happen (and most likely HAS happened) in violation of causality. This in turn calls much of what we think we know about history, prehistory, and cosmology into question.

>> No.54159649

>>54153666
light travels through spacetime

So they're right, the aether exists, it's not nothing, it's spacetime itself

>> No.54159684

>>54159649
Not to mention that "vacuum" is actually full of particle-antiparticle pairs constantly appearing and annihilating. One hypothesis on the emdrive is that it pushes against these particles to create thrust. If that's true, we might as well say "aether" instead of "quantum virtual particle pair foam" since it's shorter.

>> No.54159711

>>54159533
It looks to be a structural hardpoint where the hammer ship hits. They look like they trained specifically for this. If you look at the first star destroyer crashes into broadside (obviosly imparting a great deal of energy and thus damage to a wide section) and lifts up a horizontal section, something that's probably far easier to do due to how it's constructed than slicing vertically through the ship.

Like grains in wood, it's easier to cut one way than the other.

>>54159684
Aether as the short form of QVPPF seems pretty nice.

>> No.54159980

>>54147081
>Gravity exists kiddo
You mean weight? The Earth is flat. You've been lied to kiddo.

>inb4 globetards post cgi pictures of space

>> No.54160063

>>54159649
That was ultimately the conclusion after much testing; that either the aether did not exist and there was clearly something more to light (there was and current theories do indeed deal with this "something more") OR that the aether did in fact exist but had absolutely no properties other than existing and could not be interacted with in any way what so ever leading to it existing in a state such that it might as well not exist.

>> No.54160222

>>54142077
>Alcubierre Drive-equipped ships must be built with top of the line reinforced hulls
>This is not because they need to withstand relativistic impacts. In fact, matter that enters the bubble formed by an active Alcubierre drive behaves as if the drive and the ship attached to it are stationary, with everything else moving at the same perceived velocity as it would be had it not passed through the bubble
>it's just that a LOT of crap passes through that bubble during normal travel
>at the end of even short voyages, ships are literally coated in assorted dust and debris and need to be cleaned extensively

>> No.54160316

I already postet this in the traveller general, but this thread seems pretty lively and i hope some fine anons can help me out with some questions.


Okay so i wan't to give my players a cyborg ship, but i also don't want to bullshit and handwave my way through.

So i got a few questions and the hope to get some answers.

So, a living ship could probably store fuel in the form of good old water and some fuel processors (mechanical or organic) for it's gravitation engine and on board hydrogen fusion power plant. But the FTL drive still needs his hydrogen to create his extradimensional pocket.
> How does one store hydrogen in a living ship for the FTL drive ?

Since the whole thing is an amalgation of mechanical and biological parts.
>Which systems can be taken over by the living systems of the ship ?

Well, and since my players will get shot at, since they are pirates
>What does the fact, that the ship is alive (albeit as smart as a bug/fish) change in space combat ?

>> No.54161756

>> No.54161772

>> No.54161792

>> No.54161914

>>54141546

>> No.54161949

>>54141693
Fuck einstein.

>> No.54161970

>>54160316
>hydrogen storage
Fat tissue is hydrogenated lipids. The ship stores fuel by eating.
>living systems
The ship should have plant-like systems for exchanging CO2 for oxygen, and for water filtration and routing. Make it warm-blooded and it handles climate control entirely through living systems that self repair and can't be EMP'd. Grappling arms should be Space Tentacles as well for maximum control and flexibility. If you're still short on ideas, watch Farscape.
>how does a living ship handle combat
Not well. It'll either run away when given half a chance (again, watch Farscape), or try to kill and eat the other ships. Neither option works well for space pirates interested in salvage or boarding action. C&C systems are best left purely electronic/mechanical/biomechanical without the ship having much of a brain.

>> No.54162252

>>54141693

webway

or some similar thing that depends on a network of interstellar pathways, I got the idea from Glen Cook's 'The Dragon Never Sleeps.' Some precursor race laid the pathways using sublight drive.

>> No.54162371

>>54145706
The are support ships. So one might have ECM equipment, another Starfighter controllers, yet another tactical coordination, even physically blocking Starfighter attack angles is useful.

>> No.54162534

>>54141708
>BRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAP

>> No.54162947

>> No.54163082

>>54145105
Wouldn't that massive structure unbalance the spin of the planet?

>> No.54163107

Elite might have a shitload of flaws as a game but I really like the aesthetics, sounds and effects of the capital ships.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de78Odrw6KE

>> No.54163144

>>54149727
Did they make on the right out of greebles?

>> No.54165050

>>54163082
1. it doesn't really look massive enough for that to me, for whatever that's worth
2. there could be a second one on the other side
3. it might be fitted with the same tech that lets star destroyers just park hovering over a city with nobody batting an eye

It manages to look cool, have to grant it that.

>> No.54165375

>>54145706
You fight with the navy you have.

>> No.54165380

>>54145105
I did dislike how it was all of a sudden possible to just jump in and out close to a planet. Looking past that, all awesome and the bad light it shows the Imperials in would probably be well deserved.

>> No.54165421

>>54149689
>hard sci-fi
>no shenanigans
>interstellar travel

I sincerely wish you luck coming up with a "pick three" that doesn't catastrophically break suspension of disbelief for you or any of your players.

>> No.54165451

>>54149770
It's longer than the first Death Star is wide, but the DS1 would have more volume. The DS2 is probably (cue autistic screeching about DS2 diameter yottatons trivial to build for Empire gigayottamegatons Mike Wong has an eight (gigaton) pack) just flat out bigger.

>> No.54165502

>>54152850
Nowhere I think. I _think_ it was a "muh giant SD lineart" thing that someone took the piss out of by adding the text. It _may_ have been the fruit of the Nationstates IRC or else that fucking Kraut ripped it off from some other funny guy.

>> No.54165520

>>54141693
Spacefolding is way the fuck better than anything else. See Macross, Battletech.

Ships blinking out of existence or sinking into a spacetime vortex makes me super-hard.

>> No.54165561

>>54153416
Haven't we seen GSVs between 5km and 200km ish? Plus, normally all you see is a perfectly reflecting ellipsoid - your ship looks to have built a really showoff-y hull for itself so it probably puts in extra work to make itself visible.

And probably obnoxious.

"Tell me 'Lord' Vader, isn't having an Empire pretty stupid? And serving a walking raisin like that when you could do your own thing. Not that it would be a good thing to take you off your leash would it, Anakin?"

>> No.54165626

>>54156422
Was one of them Greg Egan's Diaspora? (a small but important part of the story and I do recommend it, but here's the tl;dr)

The uploaded posthumans spend 800 years working to generate a microscopic wormhole pair to provide FTL. They separate the wormholes, toss a photon or whatever in, nothing happens. After a few days it pops out on the other end, exactly as lightspeed would have had it. Back to using STL.

>> No.54165638

>>54150431

This is a spaceship thread, not a space pirate captain thread

>> No.54165684

>>54160316
Generally I think the (pseudo?)organic part is best left for building the ship and making it its own dock for repair and modifications. You get your fancy coral look and the ship doesn't die from radiation and combat damage.

The actual living ship is IMO a bad idea (but it can be cool in its own context especially if living ships can do something special like fly by telekinesis or whatever) but you could consider the crew to be living parts.

When you said cyborg ship I first thought you meant a ship crewed by cyborgs which IIRC is doable at high TLs in Traveller.

>> No.54165724

>>54163082
The Ruinous Powers protect the edifice raised up in their honor.

>> No.54165744

>>54118430

>>54115988
>>54116064

>I love these realistic designs, they feel much >more closer than many other designs and I >know that everything can be explained about >them.

>MOAR

Here's the clip they're from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXeUkrlxQ98

>> No.54166000

>>54165744
The only nitpick with them I would have is that lasers wouldn't be visible from the side in a vacuum.

>> No.54166067

>>54141747
I love how you can always tell when something comes from homeworld artworks

>> No.54166274

>>54166000
Yeah, it seems like a deliberate choice from what I read on his old webpage.

>> No.54166394

>>54142969
Chris Foss is the god of spaceship paintings

>> No.54166843

>>54160316
>> How does one store hydrogen in a living ship for the FTL drive ?

What? Living systems exchange hydrogen constantly in the form of protons. Your molecules are mainly made of hydrogen attached to carbon, just look at any lipid formula or even water and realize that hydrogen is everywhere in biochemical systems, you can get moles and moles of hydrogen for free, and even if we talk about isotopes I wouldn't think you should find that many differences for tritium or deuterium
>>Which systems can be taken over by the living systems of the ship ?

As many as you want to handwave or investigate. You can even make lasers out of proteins, control systems are not really that limited by neurons just make sure to make them big and hot to accelerate reactions to levels of electricity, circulation is also easy and works on all levels, and contrary to popular demand living systems can extract energy from redox reactions out of fissible materials like uranium and resist up to 10.000 grays of radiations so living systems can make the powerplant too, and the propellant can be hydrazine(that can be produced by bacteria out of ammonia) or simple water, living systems are expert chemists into mass producing molecules so go wild if you wish.

>What does the fact, that the ship is alive (albeit as smart as a bug/fish) change in space combat ?

Again, as much as you want to handwave or investigate.

Living systems are different from normal ones in the sense that can exist on all levels of existence; that is a robot can't repair a tiny transistor in his CPU without help but a biological system can reconvert a cell into a neuron or simply eat the broken cell and stimulate others into substituting it, that means that most of the damage in battle can be self manageable if you have the matter and energy, but this one you already thought.

But try to think about living things more along the lines of nanomachines based around carbon and then realize about the posibilities.

>> No.54167304

>>54165421
Interstellar travel is possible, it just takes a long fucking time, which is exactly the point of my setting.
It's not for a game, though.

>> No.54169660

>> No.54170274

>> No.54170294

Nobody escapes the garden.

>> No.54170838

>>54141693
Ether diving: Dive into a lower dimension where you have to spend MORE time traveling than if you stayed in "reality". When you "surface" an observer in real space would see it as you spent less time traveling a set distance than would otherwise be normal. The deeper you dive the stronger the inverse relationship is.

Example: Heading to a start 10 lightyears ( ly ) away. Accelerate to 0.25 speed of light ( c ). Normally trip would take 40years in real space.

Instead, accelerate to 0.25c and "dive" to a "depth" of 5. The ship must spend 200 years (subjective) in the ether. Once it "surfaces" the relative time the trip would take is 8years.

Dive deep enough an the trip would be near instant relatively, just better build that ship good and have awesome stasis. Can also use it for neat parlor tricks like: turning your week of vacation time into month/year/decade long luxury cruise; waiting out icky radioactive decay; jailing hyper criminals; repairing combat damage and returning to the fight, while its still going one; etc.

>> No.54170961

>>54170838
That's pretty neat, anon

>> No.54171465

>>54141693
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enyN7_vhvM8

Number 2.

>> No.54171945

>>54145242
>Sir, those are rebel ships

You'd think that they'd have something that would be able to tell them that other than having to look out the window at them

>> No.54172002

>>54156424
That turret doesn't seem like it'd be very effective because half the time it'd be aiming directly at those two engines or whatever they are

>> No.54172472

>> No.54172906

>> No.54173349

>>54149727
the right one is fucking disgusting

>> No.54173357

>>54154289
Some of these are stations or structures though.
https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0495/90/1475376131344.jpg

>> No.54173418

>> No.54173764

>> No.54173992

>>54149727

for our Final Metamorphosis, we have replaced armor plating with pretty suburban shopping malls. Let's see if anyone notices.

>> No.54174724

>>54166843
>nanomachines based around carbon

I want to give my players a strange but functional ship, not make them the uncontested gods in the sky.

>> No.54174899

>>54174724
I personally prefer machines that behave in an almost organic way, nanomachines are not magical.

>> No.54175175

We need more organic ships

>> No.54175190

>>54174899
They're extra cool when you mix them in with crystalline or fluid circuitry for the "glowing rocks in the jungle" interface aesthetic. My ideal spaceship is a cross between Rayquaza, Mayan ruins, and a Starfleet cruiser.

>> No.54175279

>>54175175
Then we shall get them

>> No.54175314

>>54175279

>> No.54175421

>>54175314

>> No.54175584

>>54170838
This is a freaking cool idea.

>> No.54175681

>>54175175

>> No.54175824

>>54175279
space boats got tits

>> No.54176042

>>54170294
20 assault frigates in sphere formation.

>> No.54176142

>>54175681
Watch out, that thing'll cruise right up your b-hole

>> No.54176217

>>54175824
I'm glad somebody is looking for the important things in live.

>> No.54176417

>>54141693
One I'm playing around with four a setting:
The universe has at least four spatial dimensions, and by moving through the fourth dimension, distances that seem vast can be covered in relatively little time. Your ship needs something that can calculate your 4D route and bring you through it: most ships use a really advanced AI or computer to calculate the route, and some sort of incredibly powerful generator to produce the energy needed to let the ship navigate those four dimensions. Some ships have 4D drives that are actually advanced cages for lobotomised, 4D shoggoth-like creatures: being 4D themselves they have no trouble navigating 4D space, so they're given coordinates and set off, dragging the ship with them.

>>54170838
That's a pretty slick idea my man.

>> No.54176764

>>54173992
>>54173349
>>54163144
Blame Blizzard for fucking up the BC cinematic model so bad in SC2. They don't even keep the models consistent over the various classes, its the same model for any BC, regardless if it was a Behemoth, Minotaur or Gorgon.

>> No.54176788

>>54170838
pretty baller idea.

I'd imagen that space battle would be more like a game of rocket tag.
Ships with powerfull weapons which aim do deal fatal damage.

>> No.54180262

>>54150431

>> No.54180873

>> No.54182276

>>54156477
>battleship
>not even cathedral on board
were they even trying?

>> No.54182308

anyone got pictures of ship interiors?
especially command bridges?

>> No.54183451

>>54170838
shit, that's awesome

>> No.54184273

>>54174724
>not make them the uncontested gods in the sky.

Then use the TL to stablish as many limits you want. Althought a cybernetic ship is something pretty advance I can mostly describe the biological parts.

For example, lets stablish limitations:

>Biological systems do not take easily high levels of energy in short times, that means that you can't use high powerfull lasers or railguns and you are only limited to missiles and drones. But in limitations you can specialize, taking advantage of being able to grow your ammo and according to the needs you want; from biological nukes(Casaba-Howitzers not excluded), armor devouring bacteria/fungus or simple high mass/density slugs capable of self propelling and steering themselves with precision. The limit is what materials do you have available and how much energy can you send into the synthesis of more biological missiles

Of course, they can be taken down on their way there, but you can choose to armor them or make more of them, according to the situation they can be adapted in minutes.

>Your ship basically cannot land on plannets with atmosphere, the only way to do so is with lithobraking which just mean a controlled crash and a big shield to absorb the impact and breaking, so you would need to grow another plus the extra fuel+propellant to reach orbit again which is surely a time consuming task.

>Your ship has problems with communications and computer systems, that means that while you don't need a fuel depot and are invulnerable to hacking you cannot interface with other ships in any way, you cannot receive images or complex data and any task that requires coordination with electronics(pretty much everything in space) is impossible unless you design and create the required biochemical-electronic interface which of course is not easy to make.

I could go on or even explain ways to biologically overcome this, but this is just to say that you can establish limits too.

>> No.54184589

Time and space are very related is what people have been getting at I think. If you travel through space, you have traveled through time, if you travel through time you have traveled through space.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_crystal
https://www.livescience.com/25959-atoms-colder-than-absolute-zero.html

Not too related I just thought they were cool and might give some ideas for sci fi stuff.

>> No.54184847

>>54150431
Possibly my favorite fictional spaceship. It doesn't look very cool but makes up for it in personality.

>> No.54184974

>> No.54185115

>>54184589
>Yao's blueprint was then used by two teams, a group led by Christopher Monroe at the University of Maryland and a group led by Mikhail Lukin at Harvard University, who were both able to successfully create a time crystal. Both experiments were published in the journal Nature in March 2017.

>Time crystals are closely related to the concepts of zero-point energy and the dynamical Casimir effect.

So... warp drives with ZPMs soon?

>> No.54185225

>>54184589
Oh my. Um, could someone please explain this to a dullard like me?

>> No.54185243

>>54185115
>pop sci fake news

They don't do anything.

>> No.54185269

>>54184589
They're not colder than absolute zero though.

>> No.54185390

>>54163107
>referencing Elite Dangerous with a picture and a video.
>No imperial Clipper
I need to rectify this

>> No.54185478

>>54184589
>>54185115
>>54185225

You cannot tap zero point energy, by definition.

>> No.54186079

>> No.54186150

Reminding you guys about what could have been.
Or might be.
I dunno, i have just about given up with the devs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUArhjArumI

>> No.54186257

>>54186150

>> No.54186463

>>54185225
Temperature can be defined as change in energy over change in entropy, although it's usually more useful to define change in entropy as change in energy over temperature or ds = dQ/T. Entropy can roughly be thought of as the spread of the energy levels within the material.

For most forms of matter, entropy will always increase when you add energy, because there are an infinite number of energy levels that the particles can occupy and so the spread always has room to increase.

In some forms of matter there are only a finite number of energy levels, which means that entropy reaches a maximum when the average energy is halfway between the maximum and minimum levels. Adding more energy to the system will push more of the particles up towards the maximum level and actually reduce the spread. Basically what this means is that heat starts flowing in the opposite direction until the energy falls back below the threshold.

>> No.54186475

>>54142021
>>54142056

Wormholes don't allow for FTL movement, friends.

If point A and point B are 5 light years apart by conventional understanding but a wormhole connects them the distance between them is the distance though the wormhole, not the conventionally understood distance. Despite traveling what looks like 5 light years in moments you are never, at any point, FTL.

>> No.54186516

>>54186475
FTL is forbidden by causality anyway. But don't try arguing that here. People don't have much other than their beliefs here.

>>54186463
Yes but due to it being the lowest possible energy that cannot be removed, it cannot be removed. So no ZPM's ever.

>> No.54186725

Culture Torturer-class D(ROU) "Not The Protagonist" undergoing retrofitting, circa 1910.

>> No.54186801

>>54186079

>> No.54186813

>Homomdan Main Battle Unit MBU-176 approaching Sursamen, circa 219 BC.

>> No.54186944

>>54186516
Energy can be removed from a negative temperature system, it just causes the temperature to become less negative until it flips back to being positive. There's really nothing magic about it.

>> No.54187103

>>54184847
I don't get it, it's from a game? A serie? Books? Any help?

>> No.54187124

>>54186944
Negative temperature systems don't exist in reality. It's simulations and maths they're talking about.

Think about it. There's no such thing as negative atomic motion.

>> No.54187146

>>54187103
It's from the Revelation Space series by Alastair Reynolds.

>> No.54187267

>>54187124
there's an old russian joke
>"Who are those people standing still?"
>"Those are estonians running."
Now, if estonians were actually standing, not running, that'd be negative motion.

>> No.54187312

>>54187124
If negative temperatures ever got observed IRL it would be a strong suggestion that our reality is a simulation with buffer overflows.

>> No.54187357

>>54187312
>a strong suggestion that our reality is a simulation
that would be proof, not just suggestion
there's plenty of suggestions that we live in a virtual simulation IRL.

>> No.54187360

>>54187312
There is no evidence which would suggest we live in a simulation because we have no control universe to compare it with.

>> No.54187368

>>54187124
If you'd thought about it, you might have realized that entropy isn't the same thing as atomic motion.

>> No.54187380

>>54187357
>there's plenty of suggestions that we live in a virtual simulation IRL.
There are in fact none. It is a philosophical dead end proposed by foolish nihilists.

>> No.54187413

>>54187312
https://arxiv.org/abs/1211.0545

>> No.54187557

random events in the world normally unfold in the way you'd make them unfold to conserve processing power

i.e. things repeat themselves for no apparent reason, like cars of exactly same colour and/or model in same place on same day or even hour

same music - and not just something popular today - playing in various places on same day

plus one really creepy incident I had. I was walking a street that intersects with main street of my city. yet for some reason there was no one on the main street. then a person passed. then a few persons. as I approached, the density of movement on the street increased, and as I entered the street, it looked normal - and there was no sign that there ever was a gap in that movement. it felt exactly like video game engine only rendering certain things as you approach them. likely there was nobody but NPCs on the main street that hour.

plus you can't really meet people without realizing that at least some of them are nothing more than one-dimensional NPCs that just probably just stand there staring at the wall with glassy eyes when no real person sees them

>> No.54187602

this
>>54187557
was a reply to
>>54187380


also, philosophy has no bearing on it. our world is a product of our senses, so it doesn't really matter if its virtual or material.

>> No.54187686

>>54187380
>implying Planck time isn't the clock rate of the awesome universal computer
>implying that we're at the top of the nigh-infinite simulation tree in defiance of all probability
>implying you can count to three in dreams
>implying that Neo-china won't arrive from the future. Hypersynthetic drugs click into digital voodoo. Retro-disease. Nanospasm. Nothing human makes it out of the near future.

>> No.54187718

>>54187413
Well fuck.

>> No.54187925

>>54187380
Welcome to the early twenty-first century, human.
It’s night in Milton Keynes, sunrise in Hong Kong. Moore’s Law rolls inexorably on, dragging humanity toward the uncertain future. The planets of the solar system have a combined mass of approximately 2 x 1027 kilograms. Around the world, laboring women produce forty-five thousand babies a day, representing 1023 MIPS of processing power. Also around the world, fab lines casually churn out thirty million microprocessors a day, representing 1023 MIPS. In another ten months, most of the MIPS being added to the solar system will be machine-hosted for the first time. About ten years after that, the solar system’s installed processing power will nudge the critical 1 MIPS per gram threshold—one million instructions per second per gram of matter. After that, singularity—a vanishing point beyond which extrapolating progress becomes meaningless. The time remaining before the intelligence spike is down to single-digit years.

Intelligence simulates. One could say that intelligence is simulation, minds pathing through phase space, matching vectors, squaring the probabilities of the world away. Greater minds simulate greater things. One day, sooner than you think, an intelligence will simulate an entire universe, cruder than our own. And the cycle continues, universe nested within universe, turtles all the way down...

It's not physics. It's mathematics. It's probability. We are a simulation. The odds are an asymptote, arbitrarily far past the inflection point. One. It's not "if", it's "is". Anything else is blind, childlike, self-importance.

>> No.54187968

>>54185478
IIRC, you can, but it would require creating a contained quantum vacuum collapse, which would create a Universe destroying explosion if the containment failed.

>> No.54188155

>>54187968
And that's why the ZPMs in Stargate used pocket universes instead of tapping our own universe's zero point. The one time Rodney tried otherwise he blew up 2/3 of a solar system.

>> No.54188189

>>54156465
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fasterlight.php

The "Why FTL implies time-travel" section near the top is what made it click for me.
The diagrams make it easier to understand

>> No.54188336

>all "FTL are impossible" laws are based on experiments/observations no regular human can repeat for himself
>in truth our development in space research is deliberately stumped by sufficiently advanced aliens who don't want a race of douchebags compete for galactic dominance with them
>same scientists advocate against artificial intelligence, because computers may discover their mistakes and may be immune to whatever the aliens are using to influence human minds

>> No.54188346

>>54187602
>also, philosophy has no bearing on it. our world is a product of our senses, so it doesn't really matter if its virtual or material.
I can't tell if that's solipsism or post-modernism.

>random events in the world normally unfold in the way you'd make them unfold to conserve processing power
Now where have i heard that before? Oh yeah, religious extremists.
"it would be like finding a watch in rock strata from the permean! only a Designer could make such a thing!"

>i.e. things repeat themselves for no apparent reason, like cars of exactly same colour and/or model in same place on same day or even hour
Oh good god, the matrix was not a documentary.

>same music - and not just something popular today - playing in various places on same day
"I swear pidgeon bob, every time i hit this button while holding my wings thusly i get food! Now how can that be random?"

>plus one really creepy incident I had.... NPCs on the main street that hour.
You let me down. I sincerely expected you to say you walked under a broken streetlamp and it turned on. It would certainly follow from your other anecdotes.

>plus you can't really meet people without realizing that at least some of them are nothing more than one-dimensional NPCs that just probably just stand there staring at the wall with glassy eyes when no real person sees them
No, that's just your own inability to walk in other people's shoes. They probably think the same thing of you. "Everyone is such an idiot, if i ran things we'd all be high king of the shitheap!"

>>54187686
>>implying Planck time isn't the clock rate of the awesome universal computer
Pretty sure that's anthropomorphizing. It's close at the least.

>implying that we're at the top of the nigh-infinite simulation tree in defiance of all probability
Pass that joint man i'm not high enough to feel that one yet.

>>54187925
>It's not physics. It's mathematics.
Whew, Good thing math isn't a science. You had me shittin ma britches there.

>> No.54188369

>>54188336
>post-modernism applied to the scientific method
>result
>"I dunno lol"

Great job. We'll put that to use right away.

>> No.54188399

>>54188346
>>54188369
>post-modernism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

>> No.54188435

>>54156465
Everything has to be the same regardless of where you are or how fast you are going.

If you go faster than light, then you aren't going be the same as everything else in the universe that can't.

So it can't happen.

It's like how you can't make a solid ball of iron bigger than the earth. The universe makes you cut it out.

>> No.54188457

>>54188399
>le nothing matters
>le nihilism
>le solipsism

It's all aspects of post-modernism. You reject the scientific method.

>> No.54188502

>>54188435
erm, giant stars develop an iron core before going supernova. it IS a ball of iron bigger than Earth

>>54188457
not him, but I'm pretty sure all of these are much older concepts than post-modernism. Ancient Greek, if memory serves me right

>>54188399
INCONCEIVABLE!

>> No.54188547

>>54188346
>>plus you can't really meet people without realizing that at least some of them are nothing more than one-dimensional NPCs that just probably just stand there staring at the wall with glassy eyes when no real person sees them
>No, that's just your own inability to walk in other people's shoes.
Nope, a lot of people are incredibly dumb and lazy, even for people with functioning empathy. He's still wrong, but not for the reason you claim. Getting through life to reproduce and raise your offspring with a minimum of physical and mental effort is explainable as the parallelized optimization of evolution at work without any need for an extra-universal force, whether you call that God or the simulation-runners.

>> No.54188599

>>54188502
That's novas, not supernovas. The nova is the universe telling the star to cut it out.

>>54188502
>not him, but I'm pretty sure all of these are much older concepts than post-modernism. Ancient Greek, if memory serves me right
Not really, no.

>> No.54188632

>>54188547
>Nope, a lot of people are incredibly dumb and lazy,
15% of the population, on average. The rest are above that. Bell curve, remember? They just seem dumb because you're not a people person.

>> No.54188681

>>54188599
no, that's supernova. the pressure grows too strong and tears the outer star into atoms, while the inner part collapses into black hole or neutron star.

i don't remember the mechanism behind nova, and i'm too lazy to google right now (iirc it happens in dual star systems when one star is pulling matter from another, but i may be wrong). what I AM sure of, is that it doesn't destroy the star, is less bright than supernova, and is kinda periodic.

>> No.54188714

>>54188681
apparently they're both types of supernova, my bad.

Point remains valid. You fight the laws, and the laws win catastrophically every time.

>> No.54189237

Well well well, what do we have here?
https://phys.org/news/2017-05-classical-synchronization-persistent-entanglement-isolated.html

>> No.54189286

>>54189237
>https://phys.org/news/2017-05-classical-synchronization-persistent-entanglement-isolated.html

>merge onto freeway
>another car happens to be going the same speed as you and won't let you merge
Must be a fucking miracle.

>> No.54189572

can't we stop discussing arcane mumbo-jumbo and post some ship pictures?

>> No.54189626

>> No.54189650

>> No.54189669

>> No.54189731

>> No.54191074

new cosmic string... I mean space thread
>>54191049

>> No.54191212

>>54185478
Not with that attitude!

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action