Darnok

I didn't said you wouldn't be allowed to go to Mars willingly, only that for hard labor we could use criminals, because why not? I am not huge fan of tv shows.

I said it is not solution for self sustaining colony, it was only argument to point out that medieval tools could be used to make underground colony larger As for costs and low tech... IMO basic steam engines would be enough for drilling machines, I know not medieval tech, but should be easy to replace broken parts. And this could be way to reuse/purify contaminated water.

IMO amount of damage you can do with this weapon is not key feature. Ability to target any ground vehicle or ship (for example aircraft carrier) anywhere on planet is what makes it deadly weapon. And I can't imagine what can you do to protect ship from being damaged from orbital bombardment.

My idea is not about self sustaining bio-sphere underground, it is about living space that would require medieval technology, like simple pickaxe, to make this space larger. Having this we would need to send some criminals to this underground colony and they would do labor for food and air. While experienced colonists would install airlocks and more advanced equipment.

Then Lagrange points should be small space spheres where you are not affected by any SOI? Would that be game breaking feature?

What if we would build "bio sphere" underground like 500m below surface? Would we still need for pressurised compartment so deep underground? If we wouldn't need pressurised compartment deep underground then medieval technology for digging larger sphere or more corridors would be enough for survival. We could also always make bricks... like in medieval? And build smaller compartments underground for personal space.

I wouldn't mind if multiplayer would be paid DLC or some kind of KSPnet like blizzard battlenet, where you have to pay monthly fee to login and play on official servers... but paid DLC with additional parts or better graphics, weather or any other new content type... seems stupid idea for KSP.

We would be able to reach second solar system.

Nope, it wouldn't be much worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate In US in single year died 34,064 people in car accidents, it would be 341 SpaceX ITS sent to Mars... and nobody is in panic. Nobody is talking to stop using cars, because they are dangerous. There is no discussion about making driving license harder to get, so only good drivers would be allowed to drive. People just don't care about deaths, they care about profit.

And simple break during falling maneuver not the one ITS is planning to do How this probe measured distance from terrain? Or altitude?

Not sure if no response counts as success or failure. It may means it found life that ate the probe... or it found geological process that destroyed the probe...

Free market regulates itself. If Player A and C starts to switching prices to high values its only create opportunity for other players to start mining resource. If they would lower prices then other players would stop mining and amount of resource on market would fall, also they wouldn't be able to do that for too long since other players would make more money simply mining other resources and having larger profits. That is why we need few different resources. Equipment for each of them should be different and mining plus searching new spots for all of resources would require lots of investments. Also I mentioned that spots of resources should be finite, so nobody would be able to lower prices too much since they need money for moving to new mining site... once they explore this site what also costs money. Space race would be for profits not for ability to mine all kind of things there are.

Implementation of free market is super simple... Player A set price for resource X Players B, C and D buys some amount of resource X Player A set new higher price for same amount of X, because of profit Player B and D buys some amount, but Player C refuses to buy X Player C thinks he can earn money by mining and selling X what starts competition on market Now Players B and D have a choice and they will buy X for lower price (amount of resource X available on market is increased and Player A have to lower price if he wants to sell more)

I don't know how GTA V market works, but I doubt it you can destabilize good implementation. Look at Eve online, there is lots of people and free market it works quite well for few years without any server wipe?

IMO new contracts that would ask players to bring NEW TYPE of resources, rare, expensive and finite in single game scope, so people wouldn't be able to grind single spot to infinity $. In multiplayer finite resources would create realistic space race what would give early, middle and late game in each new game unique scenarios. Adding to this rare-resources spots should be random (and not only on asteroids) Also "market price" of each resource type shouldn't be static, so if few people in multiplayer starts to mine same resource type its price would be lower, because those resources would be less rare. You as competition could earn more money by searching new type of resources on undiscovered spots and deliver them first for higher price.

Phoenix was my first SSTO... but how, why? http://pics-about-space.com/constellation-space-program?p=1

New rovers for 1.2 http://imgur.com/a/WRvG5

No it wouldn't since they have other properties (crash tolerance, lift area) than just fuel type.

What do they eat?

What about probes sent to Venus? IMO we should also have flags from Chinese and Indian space agencies.

It is not about cancer caused by electromagnetic field... so no. That diagram is result of thesis that N attract S pole and now you are trying to use it as proof supporting studies that helped to create that diagram.

But this is not answer for my question. All you can do in your experiment is to say that magnets does have two poles, but it doesn't say which is which and you can't say that N attracts S and N repels N. My point is I can create hypothesis that would say: N attracts N pole and N repels S pole. Now remember to start from zero and forget every rule about magnetism and current you know. Can you prove that my hypothesis is wrong? Is there somekind of different properties of N pole field that allows you to distinct it from S pole field?

First link 15 minutes study on 30 people and that is called science? Now if I remember correctly scientist that used so small sample studying vaccines is in jail... because his studies were WRONG Please do read more under fragment I quoted it gets better with every line. Second link So those studies says nothing... as authors stated. 3rd link Ups looks like devices does affect our brains... even after "Exposure duration: continuous for 45 min".

Lets say you have 2 identical magnets with no labels of any kind on them... how you can tell which pole is N and which is S? (you can't use Earth magnetic field for this). Try to talk with people and convince them to use safer things would be good start? Or harmful effect are going to appear on future generations? Its is better not use things that we know can be harmful isn't?

You guys see things like... it is hard to tell how its affecting = it is safe I have different approach if it is hard to tell = not safe Guess which is safer approach to human health.