cubinator

Yeah, except for that one guy who tries to cover the entire KSC in a shower of heat refraction.

If you manage to get that working, it'd be great to post it. I really liked ASE, although it had a few quirks with engine ignitions after launch. It sounded really cool at liftoff but when igniting further stages it would play the stock sound.

Gene (Kerman)

@Frybert Are you going to close it? Because the other one seems incapable of being closed, I'm wondering if this one'll do it too.

What is going on here? This thread just self-reopens a couple of hours after being closed again? Is this some sort of moderator game where you try to see how long you can go before someone else closes it again, and vice versa?

Probably e. Seriously, that's my genuine guess. Infinities are weird. 1+ans=

Banned for squished image.

This statement is false. A. True B. False

What I do is imagine moulding the first shape in clay into the second shape. By that method, the volumes appeared the same. I am aware that humans are terrible at judging volume, though. I would have measured it, but I didn't have a ruler on me unfortunately and I don't know the formulas for a truncated cone from memory. Good point. The "small" container I got was pretty full though, so I don't think there was really much difference except in price.

More than the total amount of zombies that ever existed. Why did where of when have we?

Granted, but PC literally never existed. I wish the FL-A10 adapter had a fuel tank.

Trying to raise the number in the Number War is cheating.

That sounds about right.

Ah. But the houses there are still pentagonal, right?

Slightly off-topic, but I one saw a place selling ice cream, which had two sizes: "small" and "large". The "large" container cost more, of course. But I noticed that the "small" container was taller and had a smaller diameter, while the "large" container was wider and shorter, the wideness giving it the appearance of being larger. In reality, I could tell that they had the same volume. The clerk probably didn't even know this. Both were really big, though. There are lots of little tricks marketers do to try to make you buy more and pay more than you really have to.

Please clarify: Do you actually live in a pentagonal house and have one eye, or is there a place in Canada called Flatland? Edit: Or is Canada actually 2-dimensional? I've never been there, so I wouldn't know.

Of course life in a subsurface ocean will have no reason to go to the ceiling. That's why we wouldn't see it unless we drilled into the ocean and got to the bottom. My point is that if worlds with subsurface oceans are more common than earthlike worlds, and both have the resources for life, life will exist on more ice worlds with subsurface oceans than earthlike worlds with surface water.

Yeah. Some base stuff he didn't have to change, but he had to look over and revise literally everything to make sure it would work right.

@kerbiloid I see your point; chemosynthetic life has a harder time developing than photosynthetic life because they have a much narrower space in which they can live. I agree with this, but I think that could be cancelled out by the fact that there seems to be so many more places with subsurface oceans than there are with surface oceans. For water oceans on the surface we have: Earth, Mars (former). For subsurface oceans we have: Enceladus, Europa, Ganymede, and a whole lot more unconfirmed, but suspected ones, including Pluto. If this holds true to other star systems (as I believe it should, as there is much more space far away from a star than close to it) we would find life most commonly in those worlds, simply because there are so many more of them than there are terras, even though terras would be more friendly to the development of life.

When a spacecraft does a flyby of a planet at, like, 30c, it's trajectory is a hyperbole.

Yes, but that would make it all the more strange, because mercury is really heavy and I'd be really surprised to see the stuff way out there. It's probably liquid nitrogen, if I were to bet on it. That doesn't need as much heating as water, and there's mountains of the stuff on Pluto.

I totally agree with what you said about newcomers and us setting a good example. I don't think we need to worry about turning into Reddit, though. "People aren't going to change, for better or for worse. Technology's going to be so cool. All in all, the future will be okay! Except climate; we ****ed that one up." -xkcd KSP is nurturing a new generation of rocket scientists. We see many people just starting and knowing little about how to use the game, or long-timers who have complaints about how it is not as good as they'd like. Even though there are shortcomings, I think we all know just how far this game has come, and we're all proud of that. KSP will always be our great little space game, so deceptively simple-looking and containing infinite fun.

WHOA! IT WORKS! A little finicky, but less so than what I'd do before! I have to press enter twice in the blank space to split the quote. It's not too hard to remove the extra space, though. Thanks for the tip!

The switch to the Universe 5 engine has really screwed everything up. That one guy basically had to lay down all his rocks over again!