Spacescifi

This is simply an analysis of what a superman-like character would be like, at least from a durability standpoint. Inertia Man: His body (not including the hair which is normal as anyone elses) has the same inertia and imaginary density as if his weight per kilogram was converted into tons. So lets say he weighs 77.111 kilograms which means his inertia and imaginary density is equal to 77.111 tons. I say imaginary density because his body merely acts as if it has the density of 77.111 tons but is not actually 777.111 tons dense compacted into a human body... because he would overheat if it actually was. And this does not include his hair because his hair not blowing in the wind would look weird He also has the power of superman style flight, out of necessity really because I have a feeling any human sized object weighing 77 tons would leave craters everywhere they walk. Also inertia man can turn his inertia bending powers on and off at will, which allows him to lead an otherwise normal life when he wants to. When inertia bending is turned on typically he tries to stay airborne to avoid making craters or sinking his feet into the ground. So he hovers a lot when talking to people when his inertia bending is on. Durability: Could definitely take bullet shots without phasing him and fly through buildings with relative ease. Flying through mountains really fast though could injure and even kill him if done fast enough. He would be heat resistant but not heat proof, since a human sized objecf that is 77 tons dense will be a lot harder to burn through than any normal object. Fights: No human could ever pick him up, and anyone trying to fight him would fail at even pushing him even while he is hovering because of his imaginary density. Assuming he ever fought a villain with inertia powers like himself the excange of punches and kicks would be very loud. As you should expect when 77 tons or more hits 77 tons or more. A human touching inertia man's skin with their fingers could not make an impression mark anymore than they could do it with a statue. Walls: Could easily press his hand through them, also easily bend or break through steel. Nuclear bombs: He could likely survive one exploding in his face. Though it may or may not knock him out. That said he may suffer burn injuries if close enough as well as radiation damage. So did I get my analysis correct? Anything I miss? And exactly what could kill inertia man quickly besides crashing into stuff at really high speeds? Conclusion: In some ways he would seem more durable than classic Superman while weaker in others, since even Superman has been embarassed by Batman picking him up and throwing him (in the animated series). He could not do that with Inertia man.

Like if an astronaut is floating in a suit in outer space, he can spin on his own, flip on his own, etc without relying on his RCS from his suit. I guess we have biological reaction wheels or an equivalent. Maybe we can imitate whatever humans use and adapt it to spacecraft one day.

On scifi TV, movies, and videogames, virtually everybody and their mom is toting a DEW or laser pistol. However an analysis of their effects indicates that would not be the case if we had them. Safe Enough To Use Scifi Ionizer Beam Pistol: Somehow it ionizes air into a beam that does not diverge but only stops at the maximum distance the gun can project the ionization effect (2 kilometers). Beam is hot enough to cut through an inch of steel every half second, so a sustained beam could cut through 20 inches of steel in ten seconds. Basically we have a gun that does what Homelander's heat vision does more or less. Even so, you would still want to wear eye protection glasses or a visor because any reflected light from the beam could damage your vision. As we know, lasers tend to produce a lot of waste heat, and while the scifi ionizer beam pistol is not a laser per se (because it requires atmosphere to work and will not work in vacuum) it still produces a massive amount of waste heat. So what keeps the gun from melting? Scifi time warp field technology embedded into the gun's internals. The gun still generates enormous amounts of waste heat, but the relative time it takes to spread far enough across the gun's body to cause a critical failure (actually an explosion) is slowed dramatically due to time warping inside the gun frame. Basically once you fire the gun you have a few hours before you have to connect it's coolant chamber to water or coolant to run through the gun's body walls and bleed off the heat gradually. During heat bleed off the time warp delay of the heat absorption can be increased to speed up heat bleed off, but not too much or you would risk a critical failure. Because the gun has a potent power bank source that is basically like a bomb if overheated. A Slightly More Realistic Scifi Laser Pistol That Is Less Safe To Use: Like the scifi ionizer beam pistol, the scifi laser pistol also uses a powerbank that will explode like a bomb if overheated. Unlike the ionizer beam pistol, the scifi laser beam pistol actually fires a laser beam rather than magically ionizing the air into a beam that won't spread that also stops at a maximum range in air. As such the laser beam will spread and weaken in power over distance, but unlike the ionizer beam also works in vacuum. Like the ionizer beam the laser beam can also cut through an inch of steel every half second. Also the scifi laser beam also uses time warp technology to delay the heat absorption from waste heat until you can gradually cool it via coolant. Think of it like the sun. A nanosecond in front of the sun is actually survivable, and the gun's heat build up is much like that. Still, if you don't connect it to a coolant tank for heat bleed off within a few hours of firing your gun will go KA-BOOM! The safety difference: The laser beam spread is less safe than the ionizer beam which has a max range but won't spread (the ionizer beam is basically like an instant 2 kilometer long light saber lol). The laser beam spread means distant shots are imprecise due to beam spread. In other words... not really the best choice for a hostage rescue situation unless when fired you are close enough where beam spread is not a concern. Actual Practical Uses: Scifi Laser Pistol: Due to beam spread I cannot see police using it as it is essentially like a shot gun with distance and that means collateral damage they do not want. Soldiers may use it, but only for niche situations where they don't care about collateral damage. Scifi Ionizer Beam Pistol: Police SWAT teams might use it in niche situations. The only collateral damage is eye damage to onlookers of the ionizer beam in action, but sometimes if a situation is desperate enough it may warrant it. Mainly for barricade situations where burning through 20 inches of steel in ten seconds comes in handy. Or situations where you need to end a battle quickly and hostiles are barricaded. Conclusion: It is pure fantasy for scifi laser or any other DEW weapon to be wielded by common people so long eye damage and beam spread are both part of the package that come with the gun. DEW guns are more like a niche weapon used as a last resort, given how dangerous they still are even when I fixed a few issues they would have in real life via scifi make believe. Your thoughts?

There is IR thermal vison tech

Putting in a visual telescope mode for a camera should be possible. Even if you have to make the missile heavier or larger. What's a few more dollars for a missile that WON'T miss?

I was watching a youtube short about a particular fighter jet's method of countermeasures against incoming missiles. The method involves deception via false signals. So I thought of a potential solution... for the missile. AI Augmented Camera Missile: It will still have the normal sensors missiles have to intercept targets. But in addition to that it would have an AI controlled camera trained to know what enemy fighter aircraft look like. So even if sensors are fooled the camera would not be and it would still try to hit it. Thoughts?

The more things change the more they stay the same. The year 2050: Many of us are gone or off to wherever or whatever we do after this thing we call life is over. Yet people still play video games. However cheat codes no longer are available for some games. Instead people that want to avoid grinding in games just use an AI bot or program to assist them to do the grindy repetitive part of games that they don't want to do. Yes... I do predict AI to make difficult games easier will be the future... or at least on an unprecedented scale.

The cockroaches would survive no matter what. Obviously the ants too. Rather certain anything with wings also would. Insects are REALLY hard to make go extinct.

Scifi Scenario: Mankind develops FTL space travel and finally finds a planet worthy of being called Earth's long lost cousin. Planet Neo: Whoever in charge of naming thought it sounded cool and appropriate so it stuck. Biosphere: Like an earlier form of earth... the carboniferous period of history before the dinosaurs. Where more oxygen means easier fires and HUGE insects. Humid and lots of wet rain forests. How would having more oxygen in the air effect tech devopment? How would we deal with huge insects? My analysis: More air means fuel might last longer or maybe less in combustion engine? Don't know. Starting combustion is easier. Fires too. As for the giant insects, no more showing any skin walking around outside. You would need to wear armor whenever you walk outside as well as be packing heat (a gun) or some kind of weapon whenever you walk outside.

Ever considered catering and hiring someone to do the stuff you don't wanna do? If you are THAT good, people WILL pay you. If it's good people will come. Nice little side job. At least your getting paid lol.

Gordon Ramsay would scream bloody murder if you put a pork rib inside a beef wellington puff pastry. He would be even more upset if you put a fried chicken breast in there from KFC though lol. No... better yet, get one of those frozen burger patties and make a beef wellington out of it! Gordon would just turn off the video in disgust.

Yes.... I well recall your complaints about being the family chef lol. That said you ever try beef ribs? Not as tender as pork but they are something different. I actually kinda like them. Kinda have a jerky kind of toughness to them for tearing.

I am aware we have a number of guys that enjoy cooking so I figured why not offer a challenge? The challenge: Bake a thanksgiving turkey wellington for thanksgiving. However you wish to do it, just show us the picture afterward. Also say if everyone liked it or not. And this video is hilarious too: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9WloRD3CHiA&pp=ygUedGhhbmtzZ2l2aW5nIHR1cmtleSB3ZWxsaW5ndG9u

Star Trek is first and foremost entertainment. Nonetheless at times I find Captain behavior incompetent or borderline almost. Wormhole example: Scifi starship detects a stable wormhole. What is known: Stable wormholes are rare and all known ones are artificially powered somehow. The choices: A: Fly your starship THROUGH the wormhole to check it out even though you have no idea what is on the other side. This is the most likely option for Star Trek. B: Send a probe and have it return with data. If all seems reasonably safe as well as the wormhole, then the ship may go through. C: Protocol says you need at least 2 starships before sending one through. So you must find/invite another for assistance before further investigation. Sending a probe is left to your discretion. Analysis: I get that a Captain is like God on his ship and can make the final call on matters but I cannot help but think that protocols should already be in place for KNOWN phenomena, especially if rare. Like I feel the choice to risk a starship and crew exploring rare phenomena should be something that is not merely at the behest or whimsy of a Captain but rather be structured by standard operating procedures. Will that make for interesting scifi? It can. It all comes down to how good a writer you are and having the wit to either add interest to what should be boring or avoid it altogether. Like I imagine how much is left to a Captain's discretion to be LESS than what he's bound to do or face the consequences for violating standard operating procedures. More analysis: Everywhere you go should be preplanned in your itinerary, and whatever home space port agency you work with will keep a record of that. That way if you go missing they know where to look. This is even more important when FTL is involved. If you do decide to travel OUTSIDE your itinerary then you leave "bread crumbs" so you can be found. As in space beacons you drop off that tell ships looking for you where you actually went. Or if you are Star Trek you have FTL radio comms so you can just send a message back to base. Thoughts? Is my take versus Star Trek's more or less realistic? EDIT: Like Degrassi Tyson says, "Don't risk it unless you need to." That is the wise course as a Captain, albeit not the most adventurous. If you do not NEED to risk something don't. Other times you need to risk something because there is no reward without risk. Final Edit: I guess the matter is ultimately decided by risk versus reward. At times a risk is considered worth the potential reward. For example astronauts face all sorts of risks but the rewards they reap are for the benefit of potentially all mankind.. or at least their nation.

That is a valid point. Possibilities: Smaller creature, likely winged for steering/gliding, whereas thrust is for takeoff. As for air storage, maybe a more exteme version of what dolphins do? Storing oxygen in their muscles through a far greater amount of myoglobin than normal terrestrial animals have. Then releasing it as a gas for thrust on demand.

So imagine that there are creatures anatomically designed for powered jet flight. As such, they have mouths capable of sucking in large amounts of air at once, and have a pair of movable (made of bone) exhaust tubes that allow for steering and thrust through pressurized air exhaust (like octopuses have except with air instead of water). How one would design an organ or mouth capable of sucking in large amounts of air I do not know, but physics does not object to it as impossible. They can store enough air for a burst lasting 30 seconds.... or just keep their mouth open while sucking air for infinite air thrust until they stop from exhaustion. Where do they store the air? Bone tanks, which are designed sturdy enough that they don't leak air. Factors: The more dense the atmosphere the easier it becomes from an anatomical engineering stand point to pull this off. How possible is thus according to physics? And don't worry about evolution since this is basically god-mode engineering of new species to inhabit alien worlds (because what else do you do when get super advanced but play god?).

Sounds an awful lot like Krypton lol (they went with birth control).

The body has natural healing systems, so provided you eat right and treat the body well chronic disease could be overcome or reversed... since everyone reverts to a HEALTHY 30 year body without deformity or disease. Any diseases or deformity from there on after is on them or the environment they live in. They would not be immune to poison/radiation, but could heal over time if the damage is stopped. Think like a much slower version of the healing factor Wolverine has... meaning non-fatal wounds or injuries you could actually heal from if given time to do so. Granted some will abuse this but that's a given for anything involving life in general so...

I think this is a worse case scenario. I think it more likely entropy/murphy's law would prevail over the spread of uber theocracy. After all, fear of death is a large part of ANY organized theocracy. Take that away and people have more incentive to take what is theirs because death won't stop them. Also a literal link to the past would actualky hurt myths of what people did or did not do, since eye witnesses would exist to say otherwise. Unless you have the power to get rid of them, which in of itself is kind of horrifying. As power will then be in destroying information/life rather than preserving it since knowledge preservation will be a given so long immortal folks are not killed off and they keep writing books or talking.

Roman legions packing heat is the funniest phrase I have heard in a while lol. Largely because of how anachronistic it is. It's like velociraptors with AK-47s, only more realistic because humans have hands and velociraptors don't have anything quite as good for handeling tools (claws that long kind of kill any tool handeling at length).

Well... if an emperor wanted to advance technology ASAP I hate to say this, but war might be inevitable as a method he uses. Looking back at modern history, it's not to say we would NOT have modern inventions today, but some of them we likely would not have had so soon if we as a species did not feel a need for them (I am looking at you Oppenheimer).

Will check her out. The fact that she feels similar to me (a longtime Star Trek fan during the DS9 run) about the Picard series already kind of endears her content to me.

Scenario: After Jesus death in the first century mysteriously no one dies from old age anymore. Anyone older than 30 deages to 30. How would the world look today technology wise and would the USA even exist? My thoughts: This would be radical. The thing I find most fascinating is the LITERAL link to the past that never dies (people). What that means is cultures no longer die off with the people that made them, they only evolve. As for history, death being the huge factor in it, taking that out of the equation changes the outcome. Dramatically. Basically what happens is that the most organized and ambitious civilizations dominate and evolve over time. Ironically I think when you delete old age and death as a given, governments and civilizations ACTUALLY survive longer than they would have if not for natural death. Since competent people in charge tend to stay there instead of being replaced as a necessity because of old age/death. Probably the most concerning thing is the evolutionary process... we will have already tried and seen what does and does not work for over two millenia when the year 2024 hits. Mankind's superpower is not strength, for even beasts far surpass us there. Our superpower is our greater capacity for learning and choosing to learn from our mistakes. My guess is, the world is western dominated faster than in the original timeline (Rome goes on a bit of a rampage) but like the original timeline, colonies (like the Americas) become self sustaining by either rebellion or being granted independence. Edit: What would the world population look like in 2024 and would that even be sustainable? Edit 2: Mozart might still die (died at 35 OTL) since he was a bit of a party animal. Beethoven would either have transitioned to rock music or be writing his 59th Symphony lol).

You've seen the news about oceans on Mars have'nt you? Living like mole rats will save humans from radiation exposure, but building the infrastructure would be time consuming, expensive, and risky.

Just curious. Like I already know the crew will just have to tough it out hecause they signed up for the cutting edge of science (can't make an awesome omelette without breaking eggs), but even once the starship returns and lands, would workers working on starship repair have any increased cancer risk just working on a returned spaceship that has been in space getting battered by radiation for months? Or is this not really anything to worry about? So really that is perhaps one of the few things scifi gets right lol? If you could have SSTOs that have been in space for years, the hull could be safe to come near without getting lethal doses of radiation after it landed. Edit: Actually... it depends. If said ship has been flying around uber radioactive space (near or around jupiter) or been shot up with particle beams or nuclear howitzers... the hull could very well be radioactive. So instead of landing a damaged and radiated ship you would just use escape pods to reach a planetary surface. Just another reason why real science makes scifi require more steps for safety than scifi which either eliminates them or drastically reduces them.