KerikBalm

Members
  • Content count

    3885
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1524 Excellent

2 Followers

About KerikBalm

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator
  1. trisomy is really really bad. Of the 23 pairs of chromosomes, only 1 pair can become a triplet and still have the baby survive until birth, and only specific pairs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trisomy#Human_trisomy Chomosome pairs 8,9,13,21,22,23 (sex chromosomes), can "tolerate" trisomy. That means 17 out of 23 chromosomes cannot come as a triplet instead of a pair. 2 sperm can fuse with an egg in rare cases, but thats going to introduce a 3rd copy for 17 out of the 23 chromosomes that cannot tolerate a 3rd copy... the egg will not be viable. Chromosome 21 is the smallest, or just about the smallest chromosome, and its the most common form of trisomy in humans, because the other forms of trisomy are lethal and you won't find humans that survive other forms of trisomy. Thus the most familiar case of trisomy that you may be familiar with is Down Syndrome... and thats just chromosome # 21, the smallest chromosome, with a 3rd copy. Many of the other forms of humans with trisomy are mostly observed when there is an additional partial copy of a chromosome. In some cases that full chromosome is lethal, but sometimes a smaller fragment of the chromosome is not embryonic lethal
  2. What did you do in KSP today?

    Well, your first pic looks like the engine bell sticks down below the 4 tanks. I have ISRU lander designs similar to yours that seem to work fine. Also, it seems that your landing struts weren't deployed, I'd also disagree with the last point, just make sure that you kill lateral velocity before touchdown... doing it *during* final descent is fine IMO
  3. Have you ever been to eeloo in career mode

    I've sent craft on the way to eeloo... but never actually got there before I started another game... So, only in sandbox
  4. Thread to complain bout stuff

    Yea, I still do want to work for them. The company in question is a rather large Pharmaceutical company. The position would have had an 80k start salary and been a 4 day work week. After the 1st year, it would have been bumped to 88k. I'm trying other pharma companies, but... I doubt I'll get close to a job that cushy again. I was also quite annoyed at how slowly they moved... I applied back in March for an April application deadline. Early june they told me that I was 1 of 15 selected (out of ~300) to to a written exercise (but it was short, a 200 word limit). I was selected for an interview (6 people made it to this step) which was scheduled in mid/early July. I nailed that interview which was on technical aspects of the job, scientific knowledge, and reasoning skills. I was the 3rd of 6 to interview, and I'm 95% sure that I did better than anyone else. They started with a logic problem, which I solved correctly, and they commented that it was "fast" (I don't know if it was fastest, but they weren't sitting there with a stop watch... so...). They asked me to explain some science stuff in the next 2 questions, I did and they said I gave the best explanations "so far" (I was #3 of 6). Then they showed me some technical documents, and asked why something was phrased a certain way - I answered correctly, and then added the specific article number of the convention that specified the rule... which garnered a surprised look on the face of the boss (there were 3 interviewing), who commented "exactly right!". I'm sure that none of the others cited article 53 of that convention in their answer! Then they scheduled the 2nd interview for mid-August. It was an all day interview. It started with another written exercise, but then changed to interviews with groups of 2 people at a time from different groups in the company, all asking questions about "soft skills". Crud like: "tell me about a time when you had to keep a secret", "tell me about a time when you were pushing hard for results", "tell me about a time when you had to publicly admit a mistake", "tell me about an unusual or novel idea that you've had", "tell me about a time that you collaborated on something", "tell me about a time when you were brain storming". I tried to give academic/professional answers to all of them. Sometimes they asked for more personal answers, and I gave them when asked. Then 2 weeks later, they tell me that I didn't get the job. One guy was willing to talk with me about why I didn't/what my weaknesses were. He said that it was very close, and that maybe if it had been a different day, or different people from the groups had been chosen to interview, that I may have got the job. He started off saying a lot of positive things. He also said he was surprised at how differently the opinions were of me from the various interviewers. Apparently the meeting to select a candidate lasted 2 hours, and people were "butting heads", and it was the "most difficult decision" they've had to make since they started the program some years ago... but concerns that were brought up about me were that I seemed inauthentic/I was trying to give them the answer that I thought they wanted instead of a genuine answer/ that I tried to shift the conversation to technical rather* than personal aspects (I'll give them this one, but isn't that called being professional???)/ that they had concerns that maybe I had too strong of a personality (but they couldn't really tell) - so much for trying to appear confident: by the way, the success and failure of the position depends on being able to argue and defend one's point of view, and many in the field regard this as an asset.** He said ultimately they couldn't really judge my personality, and weren't sure how I'd fit with the team or the multicultural/international atmosphere - maybe if they'd bothered to ask questions about that, they'd know. As far as multicultural/international atmosphere... it should be obvious that I would do fine. I'm from a very diverse part of California, my mother is a Jamaican immigrant to the US. I spent the last 10 years of my life living in Switzerland, both the german speaking and french speaking parts of it. My fiancee is Italian - the job is in Switzerland... I think I do fine in an international setting! The interview format was determined by HR... some of the interviewers seemed like they didn't like it, and sort of began with almost a sigh and some statement that they're supposed to conduct the interview in this format. Anyway, they say they'd like to hire 2 people instead of just one, and if they have it in the budget they'll open a 2nd position with an accelerated hiring process and I could reapply and possibly skip the 1st/2nd selection round to start before march of next year, but they won't know if they get the budget for the 2nd position until the end of next month... so all hope isn't lost, but its still damn depressing * The guy cited, as an example of a technical rather than personal answer that was perhaps inauthentic, my response to his question about an unusual or novel idea that I had. I have him not 1, but 2 scientific ideas... I really can't think of any other answers that I could have given him. That's the kind of person I am, what did he expect some idea for a costume party?! I could not have given a more authentic answer, and it was cited as an example of an answer that made me come across as inauthentic. ** In the letter of recommendation that I supplied them with, it said: "[KerikBalm] has an assertive personality, and forms strong opinions which he is able to argue in a sincere and non-confrontational manner. I found this a positive asset. He is equally able to respect and accept other views when these gain a consensus and are not aligned with his. In my opinion, [KerikBalm] has appropriate personal and professional characteristics to pursue a career in [this field] and I would have no hesitation in recommending him for a position within the field." I don't know about an "assertive personality" and "strong opinions", I'm actually pretty reserved. I do like to debate technical and intellectual stuff, but as far as personal stuff and social events, I'm very reserved. Apparently this section of the letter gave them concerns which I didn't assuage during the interview.
  5. Thread to complain bout stuff

    Came up 2nd for a really great job.... 3 rounds of selection, starting from hundreds of applicants, and made it to the final 2. I haven't gotten farther than a 1st telephone interview for any other positions after getting my PhD... The reason I didn't get it... the 2nd interview was entirely about personality, and apparently they couldn't get a read on my personality, and had some concerns that I was inauthentic, or talked about technical rather than personal stuff too much during the interview... what a load of BS. And my fiancee is getting really tired of me not having a job...
  6. Newish. Advice please. :)

    Pics of the craft that you currently use would be a helpful starting point for giving advice.
  7. Eclipse in KSP

    Can we please make a sticky eclipse thread? Its far better than a new thread everytime someone discovers eclipses in KSP
  8. What is the highest possible orbital period in game?

    You're making a logic error here. Escape velocity is still escape velocty. It won't lose that velocity and fall back. Hyperbolic trajectories are... well.... hyperbolic trajectories... The real universe doesn't have gravity just stop affecting things at a certain distance. SOIs are a human construct to simplify calculations. The voyager probes will never not be affected by the sun's gravity, but they will never lose their velocity and fall back.
  9. Manned Mars mission poll

    That attitude is there because there isn't any rush. That attitude is because we realize that resources are finite and everything has an opportunity cost. If a "flag and footprints" mission to Mars costs the same as a robotic submarine on Europa, I'd rather see the robot mission get funded, because we'd learn a lot more. What we need before human colonization becomes viable is a leap forward in propulsion technology. Sabre engines and scramjets, beamed power, resuable launch vehicles,that sort of thing just to make getting to orbit cheaper. Then nuclear, ideally fusion propulsion for interplanetary transfers. Then we can talk human colonization. Right now, we can't feasibly sustain a large scale colonization effort of mars, and sending a half dozen humans to live on the surface for 6 months won't teach us much that our robots haven't already taught us, or that we couldn't learn in LEO. .... Now if I had been selected for an Astronaut training program... and had a plausible shot at going on on of these missions... I'd be super enthusiastic and I'd be singing a different tune... But I won't be going to Mars. I still like to learn, get pictures etc. - it makes no difference to me if a human took the pictures, or a robot... until the bill comes. We can go father, for less money with robots, so that's what I want.
  10. KSP Stock Engines

    Unless of course its a SSTO rocket that you can recover
  11. KSP Stock Engines

    plot TWR instead of thrust, its still 2 axis
  12. Any way to Heavy a Falcon launch?

    Basically yes. The only way for this to work is if the boosters land before moving outside the physics bubble*, or focusing on the booster and following it down to the ground... but then your main craft needs to be going high enough with a high enough TWR, that you can switch back to it -before it gets too far past Ap- and complete orbital insertion. *I actually have made some designs that do this, but the burn time of the boosters is extremely short. I even used the escape towers as boosters because they have a great TWR (those on top of the flea SRBs with barely any fuel in them, and a set of parachutes). With very high TWR , short burn time boosters, I can get the craft to >100 m/s before decoupling, and have the boosters land under parachute before leaving the physics range. Its not just just the >100 m/s, but reduced gravity losses on ascent because of that. Its not a massive help, but it helps and is 100% recoverable. (you can also do this with RATO boosters for horizontal launch spaceplanes)
  13. No, you're not the first, its been known for a long time and its on the wiki: https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/List_of_easter_eggs#Kerbin No spoiler tags because the title itself has the words easter egg in it:
  14. Asteroid Belt

    Definitely not billions.... Jupiter's SMA is less than 1 billion kilometers. Currently, Jupiter is about 560 million kilometers away from Earth. Space is big... our solar system is big... but its not *that* big See my previous post, the estimates are on the order of a couple million kilometers of separation for asteroids >1km
  15. Asteroid Belt

    Well, KSP does dynamically generate asteroids. If you use the IR camera originally from the official asteroid day mod, and have it between Duna and Dres, then Dres crossing asteroids will spawn, and you'll soon have an asteroid belt concentrated about where you want it. A few things: #1 "literally hundreds of kilometers apart is a massive understatement. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/26712/what-is-the-average-distance-between-objects-in-our-asteroid-belt Now sure, asteroids the size of marbles and sand grains will be closer, but its still really really really sparse. Note that you wouldn't be able to see a 1km rock as far a way as the moon, much less 8x father away than the moon. #2 " As you can see, Ceres, the dwarf planet visited by the Dawn Spacecraft is a single asteroid making up 40% of the mass in the belt. The next two largest, Vesta and Pallas make up about 5-10% each" Look at the pie chart again, you can clearly see that this is wrong. Ceres is not 40% of the asteroid belt - its 31%. If you're going to round it to the nearest 10%, call it 30% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exceptional_asteroids#Most_massive To get over 50% of the mass of the belt, you need the 4 or 5 biggest ones: 1 Ceres (31%) + 4 Vesta (8.6%) + 2 Pallas (6.7%) [sub total: 46.3%] + 10 Hygiea (2.9) [sub total 49.2] + 31 Euphrosyne (1.9) -> for a total of 51.1%... more or less (due to differences in mass estimates for the whole belt and each body) Still, Ceres is by far the largest asteroid, and the next 10 largest asteroids combined would still be far smaller than it. #3) "the devs could borrow some of the code from the Near-Kerbin-Asteroids and apply it to the Dres solar orbit." As I mentioned above, deploying the IR camera between duna and dres will allow you to start tracking Dres crossers. This is basically already implemented. Because the big 3 constitute nearly half the mass of the belt (~46.3%), and dres is a Ceres analogue, I modded in Vesta and Pallas analogues, with eccentricities and inclinations based on their real life analogues and the relation between Dres and its real life analogue. I named them Vot (Vesta analogue), and Pact (Pallas analogue). Pact is the one in the center of the screen, and I'm also mousing over Vot to highlight it. Duna is obscured because its a moon of mars based planet... although their relative masses make them more of a binary planet (something like a 1:3 mass ratio). Also I added a small body to the pseudo-L4 point of Kerbin, to represent the hypothetical "Theia" that formed but got destabilized when it grew to >10% Earth's mass, and impacted the Earth and caused the Moon's formation...Anyway, that's the system that I play with (compatible with the OPM mod). It does have an asteroid belt of sorts, even if its just 3 asteroids, it still "simulates" nearly half the mass of the asteroid belt. Note that Dres is proportionately far too large and massive to be a proper Ceres analogue... so when I moved up to a 3x rescaled system, I didn't scale up Dres/Vot/Pact, and decreased their surface gravities (to more or less "real" values) to make them roughly proportional in mass to the real asteroids.