Hyomoto

I like word problems so perhaps viewing it like this: I have a jar (galaxy) of water (solar systems) made of molecules (stars/planets). I then fill jars with all the remaining water and place them in another box (universe). I then theorize there must be other jars like this one, prove it true, collect them together and place them in storage unit, (multiverse). Now you've theorized that this has happened countless times as well, and these storage units could then be placed in a warehouse, and those warehouses in a city, and those cities in a country, and those countries in a continent, those continents on a world, those worlds in a solar system, those solar systems in a galaxy, those galaxies in a universe, those universes in a multiverse, those multiverses in a ERROR ERROR ERROR Anything beyond multiverse is somehow beyond pointlessly unfathomable (some of this is too) and intensely irrelevant. We barely have a grasp on our own existence within a single solar system and you would like to decide whether or not a numbering system that may be used for a hypothetical quantity of another hypothetical quantity would be useful, and if we'd use it? The answer is no, we would not use it, it's a completely useless thought exercise. Take that brain power and apply it to something that will lead us to it being useful.

Your question makes less sense now. I refer you to Kerbface's post.

^ Agreed. I'm certain this level of existence is unfathomable from our own.

This question pops up with extreme frequency, so here are some highlights and reading material: Unity runs mostly in a single thread, specifically physics. Because of this it is impossible for the Dev's to simply 'go multicore'. Since Unity isn't 'thread safe', it is impossible to access game objects from additional threads. I'm not sure how much help something like UnityExtender may help with this either, since at the end of the day PhysX is holding everything up too. Unity uses PhysX for all physics: cloth, water, rigid-body, soft-body, etc... PhysX can run from the GPU or the CPUâ€â€but when running from the CPU is single-threaded and makes use of the x87 instruction set. Fine, you might say, "I have nVidia anyways!" Wrong, Unity forces CPU physics on all systems (it's an equal opportunity employer!) Perhaps then, it is nVidia's fault. They could make use of SSE–and its modern revisions supported on all processors since 2002 (x87 being depreceated eight years ago)–or, CPU-based version the X360 and PS3 uses, they could provide proper multi-threaded support. Well, PhysX 3.0 did address these issues, too bad Unity uses 2.8.3. But even if they did upgrade, Unity would have to disable multi-threading for very same reason they forced CPU physics to begin with: Unity is not thread-safe. The only thing I've seen that may be of use is what this guy was working on. However, he hadn't responded in over a year. In any case, it is proof that multithreaded physics not only matter, but can also be done. Sources - http://semiaccurate.com/2010/07/07/nvidia-purposefully-hobbles-physx-cpu/ http://www.tomshardware.com/news/phyx-ageia-x87-sse-physics,10826.html http://entitycrisis.blogspot.jp/2012/08/really-really-easy-multithreading-in.html Unity multithreading and physics is a huge debate, most of which has taken place is various forums and answer groups. Search for 'unity thread safe, unity threaded physics, etc...) and wade through conflicting opinions on the matter.

All this KSP got me wondering, is it possible to stop in space? Is there a place in the Kerbol system where you could theoretically reduce your speed to 0? I never really thought about it before, but if everything is in the SOI of another object, technically you can never be at rest in space. Secondly, when you are doing a transfer orbit, should you enter the SOI from the outside, or the inside of the orbit? Which is more efficient?

Is there something Kethane doesn't become?

I agree with Mihara on some points here. The only thing which can define a person is the observer, and as ourselves we are a selfish observer. That is to say, you have an intrinsic bias towards your own implicit state. Given that existence appears to indeed be a state dictated by systems which can be understood; any estimation of your physical body as a representation of your person however, is wildly hypothetical. The body is in a constant state of replacing itself, you are no more a person you were ten years ago than the person you were yesterday. The neurons supposedly responsible for a decision today may be gone before a verdict is made. Are your memories reliable or the byproduct of cellular replacement? The problem with being a selfish observer is there is no second state from which to contrast. It is little more than acceptance. I think, therefore I am. The definition of a person then, is merely a accepted consensus of general patterning, as really, that's the portion of it that tends to appeal to other observers. To ask, "What is a person?" Is just a different version of "Why am I here?" or "What is the meaning of life?" Both which reveal the same answer; dictation by the observer. Consensual observation is what dictates the entirety of your existence. If you believe everything is well and fine, everything is well and fine because that is what you perceive to be true. Our reluctance for change is a prime example, we prefer ordered similarity to chaotic change. If change must happen, we prefer it in measured doses rather than sweeping adjustments. Therefore, a person is what you see when you see a person. This has proven useful to manipulate; typically a lack of perceived similarity between an aggressor and their victims is characteristic. We are more likely to incite violence and aggression against something we perceive as different from ourselves. We are people, they are things. Etc...

No, I would never use this. Kerbface is correct, these are all the same size. What you've done is: a = 1; b = a, c = b, d = c; etc...

I have to agree with stupid_chris (not implying anything!). I used to have 'moar boosterz' fever until I realized that's no substitute for smart design. This is definitely the product of Kerbal engineering though. I suspect the majority of it's thrust is used to lift the fuel used to generate the thrust that lifts the fuel ad infinitum.

I'll go ahead and take the dumbest approach. The + sign indicates the method of its logic. This method is addition. Thus, 1+1=2 can only be solved with addition. The only way to change this is to take it completely into another context.

I tried to create a trike once but I couldn't get the wheels to agree with one another, that is freaking awesome! Way to take it a step further!

Perhaps, but does that include the runway?

Congrats! Feels good, don't it?

^ Seconded. Excitement is critical mass.

Will the models Mulbin was working on be integrated in the next version? Or if not, at all? Just wondering what became of those talks.

I'm going to double click the .exe. Afterwards, anything could happen. Something to involve flags, drop pods and Mun. Also, my Race Car will get a lot lighter.

I'll give it a whirl, reserving this space. EDIT: I was thinking there must be some sort of official race track, being that isn't the case, perhaps you should highlight the route we should be taking? Also, top vehicle speed is pointless, the tires pop at sixty. Without flying, sixty is the maximum speed, so circuit time is likely the best factor considering it involves design and driving skill.

Since art is perception, the only obstacle to its quality is self-perception. Consider this: the majority of people do not attempt what you've done, simply because they are too afraid to put lines down on a piece of paper. If your goal is to get other people to like your work however, well, that depends a lot on the crowd. We all agree that a painting of a bowl of fruit is good when everyone sees it. However, when someone sprays a paint enema onto a canvas from a swing; well, only a select crowd gathers to bid on that 'masterpiece'. That being said; of course a proper tablet, better software and training helps. When you start a fire, no one cares whether you used tinder or matches once everyone is warm.

source If they are working on the terrain, that's a good thing to me. With the memory optimizations out of the way, it's not unreasonable to think they'll work on beautification.

I have the same problem, but mine always pull to the left. I was told it's a flaw in the floating point calculations which causes this instability. The easiest thing you can do is put four wheels on instead of three.

KSI "Kerbal Space Initiative" MIA "Memoratus in autumnum" That is awesome.

Unless I haven't zoomed out far enough, I'm fairly certain it's impossible to fly from Earth to the Mun.

The day I chose to try this mod out, you were hired. Sounds like a win to me. I hope they put your talent to good use. I like the pieces save for they are very circumstantial. I have the same complaint with a few other parts mods; I like the stock parts because they mostly all fit together (some of the aerospace parts, obviously, not so much). The command pods are freaking awesome. And the quality throughout cannot be denied. Fantastic work. I eagerly await what is to come from your official capacity. However, I do not know if there are rules that prohibit a staff member from having a 'pet project', so it may be possible he'll decide to maintain it on the side. This is the problem with mods and modding in general. There is a sort of general agreement with the staff that they will work on the game, but mods can come and go as they please, regardless of promise or popularity. All it takes is the creator to lose interest and voila, gone. It's incredibly selfish to be bothered at all that he would be employed by Squad. After all, he could have been hired by EA or Ubisoft, or some other third party making AFN commercials to the same effect. His fans should be glad that they'll see his work in an official capacity instead, might even ensure he'll be sticking around for some time.

I definitely don't have the best but here's some pictures then, I was inspired by other people so maybe I can do the same for you. This one is still in testing, found some fatal flaws. I recommend HIGHLY testing your creations on Kerbin, but remember they will behave quite differently out in space. This one I actually brought to the moon and had a blast! Sadly it was solar powered, and I broke them so now it's just sitting in a crater on the Mun. Comes complete with roll bars and self righting system! The second photo is of the delivery system in case you wondered how you get it there in the first place. My Solo Personnel Insertion Kits (SPIK) can take a single Kerbonaut, Rover and self-contained delivery vehicle to Mun and back. It can reach other planets, but it won't come home.

You are INSANE. I love it! Your work has had a great deal of influence on my rockets. I didn't know a lot of things were even possible within the frustrating and sometimes limiting build interface. However, you clearly demonstrate that a good understanding of how pieces interact is all you need to do pretty much anything the imagination can dream up. Fantastic, once again. I don't like to fly your rockets (pride and all), but I will take them apart to find out HOW THE HECK YOU DID THIS?!?!