Waterlimon

I believe that every mathematical expression (of course not in terms of our mathematical notation, but the basic idea remains, more like a system than expression) exists, with the universe being a part of one (the universe could be an infinitely tiny part of such a system if infinity is involved, which I believe is, with an infinite number of 'levels' below and above our level of existence, like quantum physics and large scale planetary interactions). Think of the systems like the real numbers. Theres only one of each, but theres infinite possibilities. And each of those infinite possibilities is another infinite sequence of systems, just like you always have a real number in between two real numbers. Consider the most basic computer (turing machine), and consider there are an infinity of them, each with infinite memory (infinite-dimensional memory? lets use that, just to be sure), each with a unique set of instructions, starting from simple programs and continuing to ever more complex ones. Consider the game of life, with infinite grid size, as one of the systems, with ever more complex behavior emerging as you look at the simulation on higher and higher levels. This means that the 'metauniverse' where these systems exist never changes (since there is no time or anything, the metauniverse is not a system in itself). If you had an expression that perfectly described the universe, the universe would exist without ever evaluating that expression. The entire universe in its entirety and all moments of existence in it are encoded in that expression, even if the universe was not finite, like pi. All that exists is a rule out of which can be generated every system possible, every mathematical expression and every simulation, and expand that rule to infinity, with the systems generated by the rule containing infinities themselves. We may exists as a system, we may exist as a distant branch in an infinitely larger system, as a tiny emergent behavior spawning in a complex system with an infinite amount of other just as insignificant side effects, like the life here on earth just emerges from the underlying patterns, and more patterns emerge out of it, continuing infinitely in both directions, just one of [a number for which youd use up arrow notation to represent] other complex systems emerging from the laws of the universe, laws which describe the behavior of a single layer, a single level of detail, in an infinity of them. I think you get the general idea. The only issue I have is the fundamental 'rule' out of which all the systems can be generated. Sure it can be very simple, using only the concept of infinity and some simple turing machine like thing, but it doesnt really make sense until its so simple that it doesnt exist. Dunno. Also time is not really advancing (the metauniverse and systems just exist, theyre static) even if thats intuitive, its like in an arithmetic progression the next terms depend on the previous terms, the future depends on the past, but the universe is never AT some particular point in time, its at all of them at once, but we are not the universe and for us, we are at a single point, like every term in an arithmetic progression would feel like its the current one and the other ones are not in the present, except they feel just the same. Poor AP terms. Some stuff that follows from this: -Since all systems exists, we would expect to find ourselves in a really weird one. But ours seems relatively elegant. So it can be concluded that the 'weird' systems either never work very well, or the weird systems give rise to many simpler ones. -Our universe may or may not be cyclical -When our universe 'dies' in that our chemistry or life like we know it wouldnt work anymore, it doesnt mean a new universe cannot form on a higher level, with different laws and properties. Though its possible that you cant go 'up' in terms of complexity anymore (our universe would be a dead end in terms of emergent systems forming on top of emergent systems). -Errything is deterministic, go away probabilistic quintum mechanics I think this is enough rambling. Can I join some club now?

Use up all fuel, get infinite score! I think you should come up with a cleaner score calculation method... The current one seems a bit messy.

if you have an equation like a=b^c then a logarithm with base b lets you find c if you only have a (and you have b of course). (c = logOfBaseB (a)) here, a is whatever comes out of the ln b = e = 2.7 or so (we call log of base e "ln", the natural logarithm) c = the mass ratio So massratio = e^a and you want to find "a" so you use ln (logarithm of base e), like you would use square root to find the x in "y=x^2" using y

You cannot do this with a finite number of basic arithmetic operations. The rate at which you gain dv depends on how much mass is left (less mass, faster gain of dv). Thus as dv increases, the rate at which you gain it increases. This is a curve. You get this curve by doing someconstant * ln (x). You get dv by calculating the value of this thing for some specific value of x determined by how much mass you start with and how much mass you end with (mass1/mass0) The reason you cant do it with finite arithmetic is because the properties of the curve are such that you can only approximate it (like you can only approximate pi). The approximation is done by doing a ton of arithmetic operations such that the error compared to doing an infinite amount is small enough to not matter.

Here I copypasted a top precision approximation that is wrong if someone made a mistake, for you: dv of stage = 2((mass0/mass1-1)/(mass0/mass1+1) + (1/3)(mass0/mass1-1)^3/(mass0/mass1+1)^3 + (1/5)(mass0/mass1-1)^5/(mass0/mass1+1)^5 + (1/7)(mass0/mass1-1)^7/(mass0/mass1+1)^7 + + (1/9)(mass0/mass1-1)^9/(mass0/mass1+1)^9 + (1/11)(mass0/mass1-1)^11/(mass0/mass1+1)^11 + (1/13)(mass0/mass1-1)^13/(mass0/mass1+1)^13 + (1/15)(mass0/mass1-1)^15/(mass0/mass1+1)^15) * Isp * 9.981 mass0 = mass of entire ship when stage is activated mass1 = mass of entire ship when stage is finished Isp = how much thrust u get per kg of fuel You can probably work it out on paper using long division and really long multiplication If you want to calculate dV, use a calculator (because by definition to calculate the ln you need to do an infinite number of arithmetic operations, so doing it by hand is pointless even if its just an approximation) If you want to understand the equation, you need to understand how the equation was derived, meaning youd also have to probably understand what ln or e mean at some point. You cannot understand it by calculating ln using basic arithmetic, because still all you are doing is calculating ln, which doesnt really help you understand it. ln is not an abstraction of some intuitive simple calculation, the calculation is an approximation of ln. The ln is the simple thing here.

The diagram could be represented similar to how source version control works, you have horizontal lines representing single craft, and these lines can branch and merge (undock/dock) into multiple parallel horizontal lines. It would even allow representing the mission in correct chronological order, since horizontal axis represents time and each craft is on a separate line, advancing in parallel with the other lines. This would mean that: -A single craft is always described as a horizontal sequence of actions -Docking/undocking always means branching or merging horizontal lines vertically -Lengths of arrows can be adjusted to achieve correct chronological order (optional, in reality only the branch/merge points need to be at the same point in time...) Instead of displaying multiple actions on top of a planet symbol, how about including the planet symbol ONLY for the transfer to that planet and all future actions are assumed to be on that planet: 1. ^ | Kerbin | O(80) | Eve | AB | O(200) | <2> | >2< | 2. O(100) | v | muh flag | ^ | >1< | 1.=timeline of craft 1 2.=timeline of lander |=divisor ^=liftoff v=land O(x)=orbit to x km (O(x,y) would have AP and PE) AB=aerobrake <x>=undock, undocked vessel timeline is x. >x<=dock with vessel with timeline x (both timelines should include this) A vessel shouldnt be able to undock after redocking to make sure the timeline stays unambiguous I guess (so if 2. were to undock again it would be put on timeline 3, not continue timeline 2) Something like this might work.

We could just assume the fuel for the ranger was manufactured in space (on endurance or on some separate craft) for reasons such as "muh 0 g", "muh free vacuum", "muh secrecy", "muh infinite free space to build megastructures in" and "muh space radiation and magnetic fields"

They gun postpone it by a week so they can release in christmas

I support, simply for the ability to interact with parts while the rocket is not in a stable orbit (because we already have pause, just no interaction) Clicking on parts while the rocket is spinning and the boosters are wobbling and randomly exploding is difficult.

If you bought it before some specific date, you could transfer it. If you bought it later, you cant. The info is on the ksp site (the FAQ section or whatever they decided to name it). The date was sometime in 2013 so if you bought it this year dont bother.

I would just make it so that you are not allowed to build parts that clip the walls of the building space (or are outside). So while you could build a relatively big craft, it wouldnt be very comfortable when you have 1 m of space between the rocket and the buildings walls. That would be intuitive as well (no invisible barriers). Best would be if the camera could be outside the building without ugly visual artifacts (to get rid of the uncomfortable-yet-possible zone which doesnt improve gameplay experience much).

My comments: -VAB limitation should be physical extents or mass, not part count. Thats just artificial. -Exceeding limits should be allowed but it should damage the launchpad/runway over time. Hard limits are lame and not realistic. -KXP should affect speed/accuracy, not ability. -Building upgrades should make information more accurate not reveal it. (predict vessel path further, more precise orbit data...)

You need RCS fuel tanks to provide fuel for your RCS thrusters. (The tanks can be anywhere on the ship (not in detached stages!), the fuel will teleport to the RCS thruster blocks using black magic called moar pipes) The fuel is taken first from bottom, unlike with liquid fuel tanks Placing RCS thrusters around allows the game to use those thrusters to rotate or move the rocket. If you want to turn/move, it doesnt directly control the RCS blocks, but instead, depending on the orientation of the craft, it gets the direction (lets say where the craft is facing at) and then figures which RCS blocks to activate, with how much force, and which ones of the 4 outputs in them to use. You should have them placed around the ship in different directions so that the game can find enough RCS blocks that can move your ship to a certain direction (if you place them all on 1 side you cant move up/down relative to the RCS blocks... and rotation will give problems) It assists in wasd and q and e to rotate the ship like normally. But it also allows you to move the ship to all 6 directions (up, down, left, right, forward, backwards), relative to the rockets orientation. H is up N is down J left L right I up K down

Some rocket building instructions that should help if the rocket is the problem (stock): -Have much thrust compared to weight when launching so you dont go at 30 m/s for too long -Have as little as possible thrust when orbiting (as you have infinite time to make course adjustments. Of course you dont want to be there too long so 1 RCS wont be enough tho) -Have again more thrust when landing to mun or something, but mun has less gravity than kerbin so the lander doesnt need that much unless you want it to land on kerbin too or something) -Try to always use as much of all the available engines as possible. Preferably use some fuel lines so that all engines are being used all the time and the fuel comes from the lower/outer stages -When you dont need thrust anymore (when you have an orbit), drop a bunch of engines as theyll just waste fuel In my current rocket i built the mun lander, then 2 liquid fuel stages radially and 1 solid booster stage radially too, then used fuel lines so the fuel always comes from the outer stage all the way to the mun landers engines. Having stages on top of each other is really bad at least with the current aerodynamics and stuff, as youll just be carrying like twice more thrust than youll ever use at a time. To get to moon: -Accelerate straight up until apoapsis is at like 40-60k depending on how much thrust you have -Tilt right (i believe its the 90 degree direction?) so youre thrusting horizontal -Keep it there until you have a nice orbit with peri and apoapsis both above 70k -Keep orbiting until you see mun in the horizon. Immediately accelerate to the direction where youre going, until the apoapsis rises enough to be near the muns orbit -When at the top of your orbit, you should be captured by muns SoI -Slow down at the mun orbits peri/apo/wateverapsis so you get a nice round orbit -Preferably on the light side, thrust to the opposite direction to where youre going so you remove all horizontal velocity and fall straight down -When near mun (1-3k meters?), slow down the ship and land slowly -Say 'meh' -Return to kerbin

So i made this 100% stock rocket, its supposed to get a mun lander with a few tanks of fuel (currently 11) to mun so that the lander could return and possibly even land back on kerbin. I designed it so that it uses all the engines all the time so that it doesnt need a ton of stages... I did land on mun but like my previous succesful landing, something broke and it started spinning crazy when leaving. Not sure what exactly caused it because i didnt read the mission log. Either an engine broke but didnt fall off, or i shouldnt throttle full speed when leaving the mun >_> (the lander did go straight until i disabled SAS to steer it if i remember right...) STAGES: 4.Start all engines 3.Separate Outta-atmosphere stage 2.Separate orbiting stage 1.Fire parachutes (for landing back to kerbin) 0.Separate command module (in case you didnt have fuel to slow down the mun lander by about 20 m/s to land on kerbin.) HOW TO FLY: 1.Fire engines 2.Fly up until apoapsis (the higher one if i remember right -.-) is at 60-70k, you might want to tilt the craft to 45 dergees around 25-40k or something 3.When apoapsis is at 60-70k, go horizontal (separate the outta-atmosphere-stage when it runs out of fuel) 4.Make an orbit like normally 5.TMI or watever acronym takes you to the mun 6.10k orbit around mun 7.Slow down to full stop over a nice flat crater in sunlight (at this point the orbiting stage should be out of fuel already... (make sure its an almost perfectly straight drop unless you want to fix dem horizontal velocity and spend half of the fuel doing that) 8.Fall until around 2-3k meters 9.Full throttle until you go slowly enough to not crash 10.Land slowly, stop all horizontal velocity using RCS 11.Land rly slowly (The wings shouldnt break that easily, but im not sure if the engines get hit or something) 12.When you touch the ground press X T and R to shut everything down so it wont start bouncing or something :3 13.Leave for kerbin (i think you should accelerate slowly so the craft wont go crazy like it did with me. Could the winglets cause it going nuts?) 14.Hit kerbin atmosphere 15.Activate parachutes 16.When near to ground slow down until its less than 10 m/s or so (for water, for ground a lot slower, like you were landing on mun) 17.If something goes wrong separate command module from lander k? Oh and there is plenty of space for another stage or 2 if you stick it in the spaces (maybe 1 more stage fits on the sides, might need to move it a bit so it wont crash to launch tower) and you could add vertical stages too :3

Seemed to work pretty well. At the start i didnt notice that the outer pillars of fuel were empty so i carried them with me for some time (not long probably) Then i orbited for a while waiting for mun to grab the rocket in its SoI. I stopped most horizontal motion and landed to like 500 meters from the surface using the stage before the lander, but then i accidentally too many stages and separated command pod from the lander while the lander was still somehow connected to the stage before it (i thought the lander wasnt activated yet because it didnt detach from the stage before it because the stage before it still had the engines on... so i pressed space a few times lolo)

It should be able to get to moon and back, but it might not be able to because i added 3 fuel tanks to the moon lander because it didnt have enough (though the moon lander is pretty big so it should still work). To get it to moon: 1.SAS on, RTS off, full throttle, start take off stage thing 2.Wait until the stage runs out of fuel, then separate it (it will start tipping and spinning when theres just a bit of fuel left, dont pay attention x3) 3.Start the next stage. Use it to get rocket orbit earth (you should be around 50k km height or something when first stage is done, just start orbiting as there should be enough vertical velocity to make it above 70k km) Also correct the orbit so that its on level with the moon orbit if it is in an angle due to the rocket tilting at the end of dem take off stage 4.Once orbiting earth, you should have a bit of fuel left. Use that in the apopopapsos (the lower one of em -.-) to get the other one higher. For me it runs out of fuel soon, so just start the next stage and use that to lift the higher apopopsispapsis so that you can get to moon. 5.Orbit for 5 years until you get in moons SoI 6.Orbit moon i guess? So that the lower thing is lower than 100k km (not sure how low it can be before problems) 7.When at lower thing, stop the ship completely so it falls straight (as straight as possible, because you dont want any horizontal velocity >.> RCS wont help much) 8.Wait until near ground 9.Apply some thrust to slow the descending and reduce amount of horizontal velocity if you feel like it 10.Land normally (this is where i failed in my last try, ran out of fuel at like 10 meters from ground -.- Thats why i added 3 moar fuel tanks) 11.Sit there for a week 12.start next stage (the first solid boosters) so that you get off the moon. 13.Start next stage of solid boosters for moar velocity 14.Separate the booster stacks 15.Use remaining fuel of liquid engine to get orbit go to earth 16.Separate from liquid engine thing 17.land using parachoote. You might want to save RCS fuel to slow down at the very end of parachuting to make sure you dont explode with the extra weight of the RCS tank on the command pod. Or just do whatever you want. Note that RCS shouldnt be usen much at all, since theres not much of it and you might want the RCS fuel at the last meters of landing to mun or kerbin. If it doesnt work because of the extra 3 fuel tanks i added, just take them off and try to optimize the flight so that you have enough fuel for landing to mun and returning (dont slow down when landing to mun until you absolutely need to?) It might lag, it looks pretty big >_>

You could try to fly opposite to the direction where the moon is going, preferably at 0 velocity if you look at it from kerbin-space, so when you have been hovering still for long enough (looking from kerbin)/flying high enough(looking from mun), you will exit the SoI of mun and end up falling straight to kerbin :3 Thats what id do if i got to the mun >_>

Ye but i wanted a big one :3 Though im not able to steer it at all in atmosphere, i think i put too many winglets there to soften the impact >_>

I just made this moon lander with stock parts, took a while to get a properly working one... It currently has 5 stages. 5: Starts the 3 main liquid engines attached to the tri-coupler attached to the 'center' of the rocket. Currently there is 2 fuel tanks. The purpose of this is to slow down the rocket so it can land somewhere, and if there is enough fuel, also use it later to lets say return to earth. (i might need to add an extra tank, 2 tanks for 3 engines isnt probably enough) 4: Starts the 3 solid boosters attached in the 'spaces' between the liquid engines (the closer-to-center positions of the tri coupler). These boosters extend a bit farther than the liquid engines and have the landing winglets (many of em) attached to them (i found this to be a nice way to do it, no radial decouplers for winglets now ). Theres also a second set of boosters above these boosters. These are used to escape the muns gravity. I hope theyre enough as i have no idea of how much power is needed to escape... 3: Detaches the first 3 boosters (and the winglets that were attached to those) and starts the second ones. 2: Detaches the second set of boosters, leaving with only the main liquid engines that were started in stage 5. 1: Detaches the liquid engines and stuff leaving only the command pod and a single RCS tank+some thrusters I attached de lander... No rocket yet, but the lander seems to work ok-ish on earths (kerbin?) surface.