p1t1o

Energy required to reduce Earth to a cloud of rubble: 2.2405e32J or 2.4928e15kg of mass-energy Source (contains a lot of data pertinent to questions like this): https://qntm.org/destroy https://qntm.org/data Since an evaporating black hole converts its mass into energy quite efficiently, the black hole required to do this needs a mass, at minimum, of 2.4928e15kg Plugged into this calculator: http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ Gives these stats: Radius = 3.7e-12m or 0.0037nm (nanometres, not nautical miles) Temperature = 49million Kelvin Lifetime = 4.13e22 years Power output = 57 Watts In other words, you cannot blow up the Earth with a singularity bomb, as a singularity with enough energy will evaporate too slowly and exist as a very hot, very small object that will emit its mass-energy over about 40,000 billion billion years... Dropping one into the centre of the Earth would...do absolutely nothing. In fact, there could even be one there now. There could be thousands and we'd never know. Extrapolating from the above, you could, I suppose, use a large number of smaller singularities, ones with a short enough lifespan to go "bang" when you want them too. But this is one of those questions where if it has an answer, it is meaningless due to the context. Ie: if you have the ability to reliably manipulate something that about the size of an atomic nucleus, but with more mass than mount everest, you can probably destroy the Earth with whatever it is you use to make your dinner. Or by ordering the appropriate equipment from hyper-amazon.

I know, I was hoping you might have a useful search term or two? There are some crackpot "theories" to be avoided. Yes it is, by doing what I said you can assign unique properties to each pole of the magnet. You will find that there are 2 different poles. Assign a name to each. Bingo. Use the diagram in your own post to help visualise. This is exactly what I was talking about, I cannot be expected to derive all of known physics on a Monday. You may as well ask "Why is the sky blue? First forget everything you know about EM radiation and chemistry." Here is a useful practical experiment you can use to demonstrate all of these things: First, gather a large amount of hydrogen. Then, wait an arbitrarily long amount of time. Observe. *edit* Safer things than sleep, ok.

Firstly, for a great deal of things, the answer doesnt matter, what matters is that there is a difference. However, you could tell which ones we refer to as "North" and "South" by moving a conductor through the field and measuring which direction current flows compared to the orientation of the poles. Please dont ask me how we can tell which way the current flows, and then after that ask me to derive all of known physics, Im on my lunch break.

Then you are going to have a hard time because "it is hard to tell" quite a lot of things about the brain, Mr.Obtuse. For example, "it is hard to tell" exactly what sleep is for. What are you going to do about that? Sometimes "it is hard to tell" means "the effects are so small we are not sure if they are beneath random noise".

I've never heard of microwaves causing cancer? A quick google only brings up results about how they *don't* cause cancer. Unless you are talking about the box you put food in to heat up, because the internet apparently thinks doing that will KILL YOU DEAD. See diagram in the same post as your question

The two tasks take different amounts of energy. When you walk over to get the book, you dont get the energy taken to move your body back on the return trip. Fetching it manually requires more energy. Use the force to fetch the book, otherwise what use is it? The force appears to be independent of energy conservation however.

Remotetech has a similar utility, I have used it on a few occasions. In one case I put a permanent station in a high polar orbit around Kerbin (about 0.5*Mun altitude) and used it to host some long-range comm equipment. The high polar orbit meant it was rarely occluded by Kerbin, instead of the shell of several commsats that you would need for constant coverage from LKO. As far as I understand it the new inbuilt functionality lets you off from occlusion in some cases, ie: if your probe is around Duna, Duna itself, and Ike, can occlude your transmission, but Kerbin/Mun won't. Is that accurate? Is it a toggleable option? Command post functionality is also of use if say, sending a manned misison with some extra unmanned landers, in this case you dont have to worry about a home connection, and your command post can have a decent window of comms with your landers for most uses.

Yesssssss!

I think its really funny. Punny. Poor old Hohmann.

"Vectoring thrust" is not a pun, but it still makes sense, at least in the context of quirky loading messages. Bad news for you though, "Transferring Hohmann" is an almost textbook-definition pun Pun pun pun. One of those words that loses all meaning if you say it too much. Pun. Punny.

Oof! Harsh! Good luck anyways!

Partition?

Grim Dawn. Best ARPG for a very long time. Best straight RPG in a very long time. Loot, stats, leveling, skills, items, monsters, scenery, atmosphere, graphical whatnots, you name it. The only downside is that it ends.

Quick question: What does this one mean?: * Unburied Duna's MSL.

Heh, take a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_tetroxide#The_Apollo-Soyuz_mishap "On 24 July 1975, NTO poisoning affected the three U.S. astronauts on board the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project during its final descent. This was due to a switch negligently, or accidentally, left in the wrong position, which allowed NTO fumes to vent out of the Apollo spacecraft then back in through the cabin air intake from the outside air after the external vents were opened. One crew member lost consciousness during descent. Upon landing, the crew was hospitalized for 14 days for chemical-induced pneumonia and edema."

I gather there was one squad ex-employee who vocalised some fairly strong negative opinions of squad. We have all met "that guy", it isn't a surprise to anyone that someone dissatisfied with his compnay/job would publicly badmouth them, nor would it be a surprise to find out that his opinions are highly unreliable. Similar could be said for another "that guy", who remains at the company, who posts incessantly positive things about it, regardless of what happens to his colleagues. But Im a scientist, I can try and look at things objectively. Lets call that one guy a datapoint. 1 strongly negative datapoint. So then we have Roverdude, his reports and opinions are undeniably, another datapoint, strongly positive. Its hard to quantify exactly how positive/negative these datapoints are, so to help approach an estimate, we will assume "+1" and "-1". So let those two datapoints cancel out, for arguments sake. An objective assessment of the reliability of each report cannot be performed at this time. Now where are we. Not much left in the negative column as far as I know. Im pretty sure I have seen one or two more positive reports, but am uncertain, so lets ignore those too. So we are at neutral. If we assume neutral, what does the dev "exodus" tell us? It tells us that the business is...running normally, with expected occasional staff turnover. That it correlates with deadlines is...obviously to be expected? Unless there are yet more ex-squad employees waiting in the wings to give scathing reveiws, Im not sure what there is to discuss. Sure, the development process of KSP itself can be debated until the cows come home (my own opinion: its a unique piece of software developed under unusual conditions, taking that into account, along with the quality of the working content, KSP and squad perform admirably), but that is another matter. The matter of the staff exodus (how we were informed, what squad said about it and how it will likely affect KSP) is, in my opinion, pretty ok. *** The insane conclusions (and certainty!) that some in the community can generate from such sparse data would put a quantum computer to shame!

Aliens [more aliens that is] have been left out of the KSP roadmap since day 1, presumably for much the same reason that n-body physics, multiple star systems, multiple AI controlled "NPC" space programs etc have been left out. Ie: because a limit had to be drawn *somewhere*. Battles/fighting/militarisation I assume has been left out due to ideas about the "character" of the game (ostensibly peaceful) but also would require significant bodies of work to add satisfactorily. Aliens, and all of the options for content that come with them, would be neat, could make a great game even greater. BUT. To do it right, you would have to add so much more content, so many more mechanics, that it would require a huge amount of effort. You think the wait fro 1.2 was long? What about the time since 1.0 till now? You would need far more content than that. In conclusion, this is far more pertinent to a discussion about a hypothetical full, standalone sequel, than adding it to KSP as it exists today. Its a space sim, an unlimited scope could include *everything*, they have to draw a line.

It appears to be explained in its own wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_correction The correction being necessary due to things such as air (or whatever gas) viscosity, boundary layer effects, and other inconsistencies in the local speed of sound. That the theory requires a corrective term is not to the detriment of the theory or the process which produced it, it merely must refer to other theories (those which describe the motion of sound waves for example) in order to reach the most accurate prediction.

On the other hand, he has been conditioned over 45 years to think of any vehicle moving upwards or downwards in altitude as a catastrophic disaster situation

Is this like one of those philosophical conundrums? Like first I must exist in a universe? Or: "To design a universe, first, build a universe in which matter will eventually coalesce, condense into stars and planets, wait for life to emerge on one and evolve into a competent designer."? (Bonus points if you use it to power your brake-lights? Wub-a-lub-a-dub-duuuuub!) I wanna reference an XKCD but cant find the right one, but it goes something like this: "Recipe for apple pie: Hydrogen, Time."

Oh no? http://heiwaco.tripod.com/carnet_propositions.htm Its about ferry-disaster-conspiracies, but still... I could go for this explanation It wouldn't be a thread about conspiracy nuts without that comic!

Be careful that you dont just create an analogue of our universe just with a "funked up" naming convention. For example, if you are going to design your own universe, you dont necessarily have to start with particles, charges and a periodic table. Time doesn't even have to work the same. Why not a universe with no attractive laws whatsoever? Congregations of particles might be statistically-driven only. Particles are assumed to be point-like in our universe, and may be a manifestation of fields. One could experiment with a universe where particles/particle boundaries naturally form, with non-spherical geometry, and thus fit together/collide/combine/shatter/attract/repel in unpredictable ways. It is hard to get into a mindset of a universe that does not require discrete particles to generate complexity, but if you are allowed to define all natural laws, there may well be little reason that this should be a restriction. Imagine a universe where instead of point masses/charge/whatever, that there was a smooth gradient between ALL concentrations of mass/charge/whatever with mass/charge/whatever distributed smoothly across the entire universe. Not knocking the idea or the progress you've made, just some constructive thoughts! (On what might be the most complicated question ever concieved/concievable!)

Well what do you expect with so many industrial lawyers present?

They've been secretly (with secretly hired devs, who secretly work in tandem with the usual team) developing a huge expansion-pack sized DLC complete with new planets, rocket parts, physics upgrades, bugfixes and multiplayer, have completed QA, experimental and several bugfix passes and are going to release it for free alongside 1.2????!!!?!?!? Who said that??!? Now THAT would qualify as an "amazing" and "big" "event".

Meh, isn't there one of these surrounding almost every major update?