cantab

Nagasaki

more commonly known as a Triffid. The building is a greenhouse ...

The Hobbi: The untold story of the invention of Subbuteo.

Raleigh

Perhaps they lived in the trees, like monkeys.

Gravity brought it somewhat to wider knowledge, though I think you need to watch the DVD extras to hear Kessler Syndrome mentioned by name.

Well you know the saying, there's a fine line between fishing and just standing on the shore like an idiot. Looks like I'm the wrong side of it.

Lord of He-Rings. The hotly-anticipated live actions crossover between He-Man and the Green Lantern.

Firespitter has electric props, I used them for my Laythe boat. KAX has one too but it's weaker.

Well my record is what, 1500 parts? That was bad before and even with 1.1 plus a better CPU I doubt it will be good now. That said, if I have cause to build and fly a 2000 part ship, I will.

You were saying? But back on topic, I think your complaints are fair and of course Squad are trying to address them with the new tutorials and KSPedia in KSP 1.1. However, KSP is a game where mostly what you need to know isn't some invented game mechanics but how the real world works. I don't think a game necessarily needs to tutor and hand-hold the player through reality (though I'm not saying the game necessarily *shouldn't* tutor the player either). If I want to know how delta-V is calculated I can find out on Wikipedia. To draw some analogies, does a racing game need to tell you that you should brake before a corner? Does FIFA 2016 need to explain the rules of football? Should Cities: Skylines include a detailed tutorial on highway interchange design?

Gilly. In a rover. Landed on Gilly by cantab314, on Flickr And yes, I was actually able to drive around a bit! Well, I say "drive", but it was more a series of jumps grabbing the occasional speed boost when the wheels touched the ground briefly before taking off again. Then Eve, in the same rover. That was a one-way mission of course. Ike was the first place beyond Kerbin's SOI that I landed and got back from.

Don't know. Haven't gone outside.

I've been unwell and was in bed all morning. So no pranks for me.

I'd say the Suez route. Lots of well-known locations in the Mediterranean and then into the Middle East and on to Asia and Indonesia.

Personally I would be happy with just lowest (in editor) or current (in flight) stage only. That's plenty adequate for simple rockets and should be a lot simpler to program than trying to do a multistage one.

browser-plugin-freshplayer-pepperflash is a package in Debian, Ubuntu, and their derivatives that lets you use the official and still-supported Chrome flash player in Firefox/Iceweasel and related browsers. Works fine for me on Debian stable.

I was surprised. My very, very first launch in the tutorial I put the fuel tank on top of the command pod, hee hee hee. Turns out that works!

Hubble volume.

and next to it is a spacestarboard. The building is a cattery ...

Llanfair­pwllgwyngyll­gogery­chwyrn­drobwll­llan­tysilio­gogo­goch (finally...)

Laythe boat? Jool entry probe? Kerbal sledges for Pol?

If I may get back to the original topic. I don't think the 1:4:9 ratio has any great significance - it's a nice integer sequence but there are plenty of other nice integer sequences. What I feel does have significance isn't even remarked on in the book - that the sides are at right angles. It seems trivial, obvious even, but I see importance in extending to higher dimensions. You may be familiar with the Platonic solids, and how there are five and only five. In four dimensions there are six regular "polytopes", but beyond that there are just three series that work for any number of dimensions. One are the hypercubes, and they can be seen in a way as the units of space - at each vertex the edges all meet at right angles. The hypercubes can tessellate space, and for example could be combined to make a 1:4:9:16:25:... ratio Monolith (at least conceptually); I think the hypercubes might be the only family of regular polytopes that can fill space. To get into more familiar terms, suppose instead that the "Monolith" had been an icosahedron. In three dimensions that would be no less perfect than the cuboid, in fact arguably more perfect. But it doesn't extend into higher dimensions. There's no 4D polytope made of icosahedra. A dodecahedron would extend to 4 dimensions, making a polytope called the 120-cell, but no further. So really, the Monolith had to be a cuboid.

Any of the options given could destroy modern civilization. None would destroy humanity outright immediately. But if and when we are blown back to the Stone Age, well we can't rebuild. A lot of the stuff used in history to build our civilization and technology is gone. Easy-to-get ores, vast temperate woodlands, and so on. Humanity would never recover from a sufficiently global disaster, and we would limp on before dwindling and dying to the everyday threats of nature.