Gaarst

Added @Snark's law. Title is subject to change, as conundrum is already used for 12th law.

Broke a landing leg, boom ?

Devnote Tuesdays.

Added @GoSlash27 and @*Aqua*'s laws to the OP. Edited a few things to make them fit better in the post: noticeably titles (to avoid generalities or repetitions) and descriptions. For the spaceplane Kraken paradox (or spaceplane collider paradox), I removed the factor of 2 to avoid a probability greater than 1. For the Hatch tensor equation, I changed the 1/r term to r, to get an increased agility with distance. Added a +1 to @Hcube's law to include the 0th term.

Nailed that Soyuz booster separation ! (at least close enough for me). I think I could even lower the thrust on the separatrons some more to get an even closer result. http://i.imgur.com/rRqT6j5.gif Well, inserting gifs do not work... :/

64bit should appear with KSP 1.1 which, itself, will be available soon™. So no 64bit for Windoze for now. On the other hand, you do not need W10 to run the game, and I'm pretty sure you still won't need it to run KSP 1.1. Anyway, KSP is good don't abandon it! Look at it: it is sad ---->

Updated OP: added @CliftonM and @Hcube's laws.

How is this even a thing ?

The E = mc² formula is not the total energy of the particle, but the energy at rest. For moving particles such as photons (which have no rest state), you have to use the following form: E2 = m2c2 +p2c4, where p is the relativstic momentum of the particle. This last equation shows that the photons do not need to have mass and that your justification is not valid, especially since photons have non-zero momentum. Furthermore, the basic definitions of special relativity show that if the photons had a non-zero mass they couldn't travel at the speed of light. This would have heavy implications to laws of electrodynamics which we do not observe. Finally, the best estimates of a hypothetic mass for photons place an upper-limit at 10-14 eV/c2 which is a lot lighter than the result you gave (by 14 orders of magnitude since 1 eV/c2 = ~10-34 kg). Also, the concept of relativstic mass is outdated and very controversed. It is better to use relativistic momentum to avoid confusion: relativistic momentum can be applied everywhere and does not imply changes to the object itself whereas relativistic mass does.

This. SpaceY's engines have toggleable "tankbutts" and are surface attachable. This makes them so much easier to use, alone on smaller tanks or in lower stage clusters. Allowing KSP's engines to do this would a good thing for creativity IMO (this arguments is used here and there, so why shouldn't I ?). Having toggleable engine shrouds was one of the best things of 1.0.5, now I would like the next verions to continue in this direction.

Photon are massless, or at least their mass is so small we cannot measure. I would like to hear how you justify this statement.

Mass is not needed for reaction. Newton's second and third law of motion do not mention mass anywhere in their original definition. The equation: F = m*a is a simplification of the 2nd law in the case of constant mass. The actual formula is: F = dp/dt with p the momentum which does not necessarily depend on mass. The third law uses forces, but not masses so action-reaction is possible with massless objects. An example of this is the radiation pressure: radiation pressure is a general term for several phenomenons in which the interaction between EM radiation and a surface exerts a pressure on the surface (or a force). One of these is the reflection of photons on the surface: they impact the surface and, when they are reflected, the surface feels a small force (because of conservation of momentum and 3rd law).

And I completed the Praha Moon station by bringing the additional stuff (see 2 posts above).

Global warming is a bad thing because it causes extinction of some animal and vegetal species and a lot of other stuff linked to human extinction in some parts of the world, especially the Netherlands. I don't think a nuclear war exterminating all forms of life on Earth would be a good alternative. A Twelve Monkeys scenario would be (slightly) less extreme if you want to trade mankind for global cooling.

Put a station in low Moon orbit, named Praha Station: Next step will be to launch and dock the adapter, fuel tank and reusable lander required for lunar landings to that station. And then we'll send people in there !

I actually think we would have landed on Minmus before the Moon, if it were not for the duration of the mission. It is easier to make a small lander and a big TLI stage than the opposite. Minmus's weak gravity would have made it very attractive. We would probably have seen a Mars/Venus like distribution between the US and USSR: one focussing on the Moon while the other one goes to Minmus.

Photons have momentum. If you shine a big enough laser in one direction, you'll go the other way. I insist on the "big enough" part though.

Launched an interplanetary mission that was supposed to orbit Venus. Stole the upper stage from another launcher for ejection and insertion burn. As it turns out, hydrogen doesn't like being stored in its tank for too long.. I guess it's just a flyby then...

Seems interesting, I kinda reached a turning point in my RSS save where I won't do regular Moon landings anymore (from Earth with the huge rocket and all) so that seems appropriate. I'll probably give it a try over the week-end. Though I already know I am going to be extremely tempted to use SpaceY's parts. 3.75m is too small for anything! Just to be sure: I guess TweakScale is forbidden too ?

Missing KerbalStuff and GitHub, just saying.

Because of the enormous amount of energy released during the supernova: the nuclei collide so violently that they fuse together making elements heavier than iron. Note that this process absorbs more energy than it releases. Though this process doesn't explain the formation and quantites found of some elements, especially the heaviest naturally found metals (gold, lead, uranium, etc...) Some theories mention that some of the heaviest elements are formed when neutron stars collide or with hypernovae.

I have the J-2 and the mod installed on 1.0.5. I guess I was just not paying attention, I'll search better next time.

A star couldn't overcome iron fusion: because iron has the most tightly bound nucleus of all atoms. Therefore fusing iron actually takes more energy than it gives out, this is why stars explode when they reach that point: outwards radiation pressure falls, the star implodes and when the outer regions collide with the extremely dense collapsed core, they bounce back and boom: supernova. Anti-matter wouldn't form (some random anti-matter always form, but is instantaneously anihilated by normal matter) as it is not linked to fusion. Answering the other questions is harder because it simply can't happen. The star can do nothing but collapse once fusion stops.

I use Hangar Extender in my main install (1.0.4) but I thought it wasn't updated for .5 and didn't think about it. Thank you for reminding me! Same for SmokeScreen and RealPlume, which I use in my install. It has been so long since I played with the stock plumes that they just look bad. Though your plumes from SpaceY and RSB (F-1 and J-2 especially) are really nice compared to the stock engines'. Just a bit sad that the RS-68's can't look like the real one. Also, I haven't found your SSME (RS-25) you mentioned a few posts ago, was it included in this release ?

Seems alright so far. I have two complains, but I don't think you can solve them: VAB is too small ! Building a Saturn V is very frustrating The RS-68's plume is so nice in real life that KSP's plume looks just bad Anyway, no complains about the mod so far, didn't find any bugs while playing for a little bit, and the launchers are perfectly able to fulfill their job in terms of payload to LEO. (I never realised upper stages in real rockets had so low TWR, I have to make my ascent profiles a lot steeper than what I usually do, and even then I usually end up falling for a while before reaching orbital velocity).