phoenix_ca

Curious. And hey, I'm still hoping to see the Albucierre drive proven as a real possibility in my lifetime. Maybe not to the point that we're out among the stars, but experimental evidence would be awesome. (No, it might not be likely, but hope is one of those handy human things to have sometimes. Sometimes.) Though deuterium is expensive. Like, absurdly expensive. (CANDU reactors use them and for all their awesomeness, those things cost a bundle to construct. Less to run than LWR's, but yeesh.)

In short, no. You still need to expend roughly the same amount of delta-v to get up to the height of the parking orbit. What you'd be cutting-out is a circularization burn for the higher altitude, but then you end-up replacing it with a circularization burn for the lower orbit, which will necessarily require more delta-v.

I'm using my phone right now, so can't really tell you what the altitude for each other celestial body is. I can tell you that the original procedure is still valid for any body with a stable geosynchronous orbit. ISA MapSat's in-game Kerbalpedia has this information readily available.

See the post right above yours.

Even the tiniest inclination and altitude variances will have a cumulative effect over time. Real geosynchronous sats need to correct for these often (along with other forces that can't occur in KSP). Just adjust their orbits using precise RCS thrusts.

I have considered that, though I feel they'll either get rather crowded, or require a lot more customization options and work on my part to make it look any good. The file for this right now has...erm...*counts* about 100 layers or so with various filters, rasters, smart objects and so on. (A lot aren't used directly in the final collection of images, but are important things I kept to be able to adjust everything easily later.) However, if nhnifong or anyone else opts to create an automated web resource that could handle the added complexity with grace, I'd be happy to revise the overlays so that they can show return trips. Though the biggest design constraint with this is size limitations; there's only so much information I can cram into that area without going over the forum's size limits in signatures, and keep it looking...not messy.

WOW GUYZ! THis is SO appropriate! THe APOcalypsE is COMING in DecEMber! Yeah, no. Great picture though. (I suppose recognizing what ragnarok is would give-away the fact that you're trolling. Blast.)

No. It was two days old.

Double-post. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/22979-Blackspace-Plan-Dig-Defend-Survive

Hrm. Come back to us when it's been published and peer reviewed then. (I'm quite familiar with the progress made recently on the theoretical mechanics of the Alcubierre drive; 'tis why I mentioned it. A year ago I wouldn't have entertained the idea.)

Methinks I see what you're getting at now regarding consciousness, though that may or may not be a semantic debate (though it certainly is a philosophical one). As for philosophy, yes, I agree the rate of progress is rather appalling, though the field was hobbled much in the same way as a science was over the millenia, and it is still currently disadvantaged from making much real progress by the false division of it from science. A good philosophical mind is also a scientific one. I don't have time right now to expand on this, but I'll leave you with (and perhaps humbly suggest you pick-up his book The Moral Landscape as well, though the lecture is a good summation of the general ideas).

97º inclination??? I think not. Pretty sure you mean its obliquity. Anything with rings would be nice. Saturn's rings would be incredible, I imagine, to see up-close. I certainly haven't seen any images of them really close. That and I've never seen a game that tried to faithfully represent rings; they tend to just be a single, flat texture. O.o

When this is done, I'm landing it on Duna. And then I'm gonna shoot rocks with the laser. No, I don't care if I have to imagine I'm shooting rocks with the laser. LASER!! PEWPEW!! *ahem*

Gathering it certainly will help. Sending it, not so much, as I'm concentrating on Kerbin right now. It's a little arbitrary of me, granted, but I'm still not sure what sort of problems/limitations I'm going to run into. Most of the big ones are out of the way (sorting and merging multiple data sources, and deleting duplicate data), but I could very well run into fundamentally limiting factors like how much time it takes to render these maps on an i7 processor. (I don't have access to computing time on anything more than my iMac, as much as it would be lovely to be able to run the raster map generator and projection modules on a supercomputer. I don't anticipate this being a serious limitation, though it may require that I leave my computer on and processing for many hours, or days.)

*sigh* The idea that science requires one to create preconceived notions (hypotheses) before doing research is a fundamental error in high school education. That structure gets tossed out right quick when you get to undergraduate work (or at least I should hope so). It's limiting. But I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said earlier. O.o

Whoa whoa, travel between stars is whole other scale compared to travel between our planets. If the nearest star is your neighbour's front door, going to Neptune is barely taking a step outside your home. O.o "Taking a while" could be something on the order of thousands or tens of thousands of years without expending a LOT of fuel with a conventional rocket.

Well, assuming you live in a country where rule of law matters and police arent horribly corrupt. (I know this doesn't apply to Austria, just saying.) Once you get out of this mess, here are a few security tips to make it harder for this to happen in future: -Install and use SpyBot Search & Destroy. -Use Firefox as your main browser (or Chrome, I guess) -In Firefox, install NoScript and AdBlock Plus. Learn how to use both effectively (no excuses about it being too hard to understand; anyone making an earnest effort can read the manual) -install and use something like AVG; it ain't half bad -never, ever run Internet Explorer again.

Hrm. Went into that with very low expectations (my "damn gamers fawning over gamer girls" alarm got triggered). Not half bad. O.o Reminds me of Loreena McKennitt's music. Quite similar style and voice.

Ack. Opening links in spoiled tags appears to be rather impossible with Safari on iOS. If you just post the raw URL, the forum will automatically parse it, hyperlink it, and truncate the text so it isn't unwieldy.

Wince you're referencing string theory, I think and adaptation o a popular addage regarding quantum mechanics is in order: If you think you understand string theory, you don't understand string theory.

It doesn't really matter. If you wish to send me 400MB now that's fine. You can upload updated versions later as you get more data. There's no restrictions, I just suggest larger amounts because small files (like say 60MB) are a little less efficient on time. Whatever you send me, whenever you send it (with multiple updates even), I'll figure-out the most efficient method of merging it with the master data file. So really, it's up to you. If you want to send a bit now, and a larger file later, that's cool. Or send a lot more later, that's fine too. There's so much data to be collected, any contribution of any size will likely be helpful right now. I'd say the bottom cutoff is about 15MB for Kerbin elevation maps, at this time. With sizes that small, most are liable to be duplicates. I'd still process and merge them, but it's not the best use of anyone's time. (If I wasn't clear, sending 400MB now and more data later would be awesome. Aside: To reiterate for everyone's benefit, please compresses raw data before seeing it along. Raw csv data compresses really well, to even less that 1/5th the original size in some cases. It saves both of us bandwidth and time.

Tbh I suggest creating your own maps for now, it's a bit easier (and the maps in the OP have incorrect elevation values for the oceans). Just toss an ISA MapSat satellite up into polar orbit and watch it go. When we have a significant bit of data going, I'll write-up a guide of some sort on how to generate ISA MapSat rasters from the data. Though the goal is to provide high-resolution contour and elevation maps (perhaps even voxel maps of particularly relevant areas, though considering how much time it takes to create those, I'll probably leave that as a special project), so that more people can help with landmarks and so on. Or at least have a good reference to go on.

What problems are you having, specifically, with ISA MapSat? And are you running it on OS X?

That area you searched in tiny. If you want to get anywhere, you'll need a satellite in orbit (preferably polar).

That's a very difficult question to answer, because it's dependant on the nature of the hyperbola. Depending on your relative velocity to Jool, you may need to aerobrake more or less.