ChrisSpace

This sounds a lot like my Alternate Solar System project. PM me if you want any help or inspiration.

Explosives can be "shaped" to direct most of their energy in a certain direction, perhaps the same can be done with EMPs? In the video I perceived them as being like a flying anti-tank mine, so windows aren't the only thing they can get through. Again, I think they could break through that. This could work, I think. Also, here's an idea my mum thought of: A modified water hose that shoots really strong acid instead of water. Probably impractical but worth mentioning.

I personally don't mind it at all. There is still plenty to explore even on such small planets, in theory at least. Plus it makes civilian space travel easier, not to mention the short travel times. At the very least it would make a nice game setting.

What would be the best defence against the nightmare fuel in the new short film "slaughterbots"? Here's my current opinion: Projectile weapons: useless Lasers: useless unless the beam width can be expanded and the laser power can be increased significantly EMPs: Could work Nukes: Too hard to acquire, but would certainly work

Hate, haters will. So, to recap, here's all the space programs that are developing heavy-lift rocket systems: Blue Origin (New Glenn) SpaceX (Falcon Heavy, BFR) CALT (Long March 9) Rokosmos (This new system)

Hmm... my top 3 would have to be Code Geass, Attack on Titan and Death Note (the latter of which I've been writing an FF for for over a year now). I'm also a fan of Hetalia, Assasination Classroom, Black Butler, and a few others.

Weather update: I think I've figured out how this all works! In Isaac Arthur's new video "Mega Earths", he mentions that an artificial planet could be made by placing a "shell" of orbital rings around a black hole, and then placing a layer of dirt, rocks etc on top of that to create a world vastly different in size to any natural planets. For an Earthlike planet in Spore, such a black hole would have a radius of 0.03759644 nanometers, a hawking radiation energy output of 0.5558304 W, and a lifetime far exceeding the age of the universe. Of course, this only solves the problem of gravity, not how the planets hold onto their atmospheres, or how the orbits can remain stable considering that the ratio of planet-moon, planet-star and interstellar distances.

When I was unpacking my school bag I couldn't find my phone, and I was completely horrified and panicking until I found it in my pencil case.

Thanks. So it looks like this really is the second closest potentially habitable world after Proxima. Still, at 0.1c a colony ship would take over a century to get there. Then again, Stonehenge and the GWOC both took nearly 2000 years to complete, so I guess it may be possible.

I once read that plants around a red dwarf would be black instead of green. As for eyesight, the difference probably wouldn't be as visible as you'd think.

It's fun to think about, even if interstellar travel is a long way away.

Back in my day, you had to go through a systemised psychological torture system for several years just to get into college! Back in my day, there were only eight known planets! Back in my day, some people still thought NASA would recover eventually! Back in my day, Bill Wurtz and Vsauce were just youtubers! Back in my day, the supreme empire of greater Korea was just a tiny state next to China! Back in my day, we had to deal with damn eight legged abominations called "spiders"! You kids probably haven't seen one, but back in my day they were in our classrooms, our homes, everywhere! Back in my day, when we wanted to write something down, we actually had to physically write it down! Back in my day, we couldn't just do as many things on our computers as once! We even had to avoid using full graphics and stuff just so the computer wouldn't lag! Back in my day, computers just had a flat screen! It didn't even change if you looked from a different angle! Every four years, everyone in America would ritually complain about things to one another. "The Expanse" wasn't always a documentary, it was originally an anime. Nikola Tesla invented the first atomic bomb, but Thomas Edison later took all the credit.

By the way, I calculated that the average "sunlike" star must have an energy output of 613GW to provide the same amount of energy to a planet one 25-millionth of an AU away as Earth gets from Sol. So by Spore standards we're above K2 status.

This size range actually isn't too uncommon in space games. Other examples of small solar systems that I can find, ordered by size, include (Spore being rank 2): 1. Outer Wilds: The sun is 4km in diameter, the moon is 79m in radius, Timber Hearth has a radius of 154 or 203m and orbits at 7 or 8 km, and the comet orbits from 0.4km to 22km from the sun's surface. 3. Galacticraft mod in Minecraft: Karman line appears to be less than 1200 meters above sea level. I know it isn't a very "intellectual" game but I figured it's worth mentioning. 4. This: 5. Every single "build a rocket and fly into space" in-browser game that has ever been made (Into Space 2 was my favourite as a little kid, where I measured the Karman line to be 6873m above the ground, and the top of Mars' atmosphere to be 22909m above the ground) 6. Space Engineers: Planets are 19-120km in diameter, "Earth" and "Mars" are 2000-4000km apart. 7. Toy Solar System mod in KSP: All planet sizes and distances are scaled down to 1/10th of their normal values. Interestingly, this is the only example that scales down the planets/moons and the distances between them by the same amount, so the distances relative to the sizes stay the same. On a side note, worlds like this open an interesting possibility of a "rocketpunk" world where even a few teenagers would be able to build something that can fly between planets. An interesting sci-fi setting I'm thinking of is perhaps one where the surface of an Earthlike planet in a Sporelike galaxy is connected to Earth in a nearby abandoned warehouse or something.

Would an Alderson Disk have more habitable land area than a Ringworld? And which one of the two would require more building material? Alternatively, is there any similarly vast artificial habitat idea with even more area?

Electronics built into artillery shells can handle up to 15500g. But I've always thought that travel between stars isn't shown in real-time. For comparison, a 5g brachistochrone trajectory over 128km would take less than 2 minutes and reach a maximum velocity of about 2.5km/s. Considering that geostationary orbit is 1.01km above sea level, something similar to the Burj Khalifa would do just as well. But considering that solar escape velocity from the homeworld's orbit is just 169m/s, things like that probably wouldn't be needed.

The Civ stage does feature nukes near the end, so I'm guessing that the interplanetary drive is something like the V-2's engine or the propulsion system used in the BIS' 1939 study on a manned expedition to the moon. The interstellar drive is probably similar to the liquid-fuelled propulsion seen in KSP, or maybe Solid-Core NTRs. Unless the Spore galaxy is the only really tiny one.

I think it could be, but not for a very long time. This isn't as much of a problem if planels can be built on-site using locally acquired materials. Yeah, using low-thrust engines in the first place seems a bit inefficient for manned crew/colony vessels, unless the distances travelled are interplanetary. I've read the report that sparked the "Mars in 39 days" VASIMR frenzy, and while that specific scenario makes some very optomistic assumptions, a travel time of under 3 months certainly seems possible.

I was just using that as an example. Here's the mass ratio required with other methods discussed here: Rocketdyne solar thermal engine: 1.89 Solar Moth: 1.75 High-Isp solar thermal engine: 1.67 Hydrolox chemical propulsion: 3.00 Laser thermal: 1.14 Correct. I assume that low-thrust propulsion wouldn't be necessary, but if it is, then not only do travel times increase, but so does Dv. For example, to get from LEO to EML-1 on a low-thrust trajectory requires 7km/s of Dv. As a mass ratio, here's what that would look like with the methods mentioned here: VASIMR: 1.03-1.28 MPD/Pulsed Plasmoid Thruster: 1.10 High-Isp MPD: 1.03 Arcjet/Hall Effect Thruster: 1.43 High-Isp Arcjet: 1.42 Ion: from 1.03 to 1.26, depending on design Solar Sail: Not Applicable

I should point out something (sorry for taking so long btw) If you have a "rocketpunk" world where individuals can own personal spacecraft, I imagine you probably already have plenty of infrastructure (Mass Drivers, Launch Loops, Sky Hooks, Space Elevators, Orbital Rings etc etc) to launch almost anything into space without the need for any thrust from the vehicle itself. So the maximum TWR for such a vessel wouldn't need to be above around 1 (although reducing inefficiencies from the gravity of Mars/Venus would require the TWR to be higher). As for Dv, refer to this map: ' If there are propellant stations in LEO, LLO, LMO and the L-points (which there would be), a Dv of a bit under 5km/s is enough to get anywhere. So stuff like Ion drives and Plasma thrusters wouldn't really be necessary. A solid-core NTR using Methane propellant would only need a mass ratio of about 2.21.

I believe it's an aeroplane of some kind.

Me. I've been slowly working on it constantly for a while now.

Fun fact: This is the first time I've seen a live rocket launch.

I wouldn't call myself wonderful, but okay. I think it's more about the fact that in order to enjoy KSP (and hence be a part of the community), you need to have some level of intelligence and logical thinking in order to do anything properly in the game. I'm not saying that action games or their fans are inferior, but those kinds of games are usually far simpler, and understandable to a far larger audience. I think a major reason for that is that those buffs/nerfs add realism, and while I'm not sure if anyone else shares this opinion, I value realism far more than anything else. I've always thought of the default game as a "seed" which is intentionally left half-empty so the community can fill in the rest, and so individual players can choose which mods to use in order to "customise" their experience to suit aspects of the game they enjoy the most. Just like Minecraft.

One of the main goals of my "Alternate Solar System" project is exactly this, to attempt to create a solar system far more favourable than what we have in OTL. With 6 habitable or semi-habitable worlds (Venus, Earth, Luna, Mars, a large planet in OTL's asteroid belt, and Jupiter's largest moon), 2 moons around Earth, plentiful strategic resources, and 11 worlds with some form of life (the above, the fifth planet's moon, Jupiter's second largest moon, Saturn, a Titan-like moon around Saturn, and a very unusual asteroid-like object), I'd say it's a lot more interesting.