So it was alluded to in Should we allow software questions? (take 2) that software recommendation questions are generally off-topic but as pointed out by @dmckee on hydrodynamics codes for nuclear rocket modelling there is no clear policy regarding whether recommendations for physics-based softwa...
Very minor thing here. These two questions
How can a black hole produce sound?
Why does a window at night become a mirror?
reference each other under the "linked" sidebar. I thought that was curious, since they have nothing to do with one another. I searched both questions, and yet I could no...
So, Are there any simulation supportive software which allow to design more or less, an aircraft - taking dimensions, and other parameters as input, etc..., etc...
@crazy I dunno, but remind me tomorrow. I'll ask the folks in my robotics group about it (it's the same group that developed+built the actual quadrotor used in 3 Idiots, so the seniors who were there at the time ought to know about it)
I know, but at least you can model the mechanical working first. An automated one is infinitely harder, though... It needs to be able to do image processing, so you'll need to have a very good processor on board. Or just communicate with a laptop via a ZigBee and let the laptop do all the processing (this will be laggy, though)
@Manishearth A similar thing... But - I've thought of using obstacle detection and following towards the radio source,something more complex - for which I require help from a lot guys
I'll start modeling it this year... Next year, there would be a lot of questions here & in robotics by me :-)
For this, youll need a lot of help, though. A few people specializing in electronics, two programmers, at least one of whom is good at image processing, two who are good at areo, and some mech guys. Note that I'm not talking about their departments, I'm talking about what they are good at.
(though if you take a sincere thirdie/fourthie who has done some core internship, that is pretty good as well when it comes to specialization in a field)
Seriously, ask your robotics club or innovation group for advice here
There probably are other like minded seniors who would love to work on this, but you don't know them
Like I said, just freshies (regardless of their stream, it doesn't matter at this stage) will make it very hard for you to progress
Because you won't have even a rough idea of what is to be done
While you all may have enthusiasm, you guys need experience as well.. So find some guys with experience and add them to your team! :)
I speak from my own experience... Some of the stuff I've done in robotics wouldn't have gone too well if I hadn't had the guidance and experience of my seniors..
Regarding the bot, you need to first discuss various components and the overall aerodynamics. Then yes, do the normal MDP process. But you need to get the electronics and programming done in parallel (more or less)
Btw, this rather long convo is a bit off topic for the chat room, i'll move it to a separate room on robotics.se when im back on desktop
We have a lot of posts on the LCH - however, the experiments are still on-going and it's possible that some answers that were right at the time are now outdated. It's also possible that some questions are now too localised (because they are very specific to a situation and a past time) and need t...
Since that one doesn't say anything about contradicting answers, and is just a general call for review, it might be more tame. I'd be willing to give it a chance.
I gave an answer to a question of Sklivvz, which attempted to explain the monopole answer before:
This answer was deleted by David Zaslavsky, for some reason. It's annoying, because I tried to explain the detailed reason for the answer I gave, why it's not in the literature, and how to deal with...
@davidzaslavsky @Manishearth @qmechanic @mbq @dmckee should ron paste the answer body in another post? We had to edit all his questions on our meta because he kept on doing that.
@DavidZaslavsky why is Ron's nice meta answer giving the physics explanations why he thinks about the magnetic monopoles as he (and many other theoretical physicists do) does deleted? It contained very good physics and deleting it was wrong and only potentally leads to many people being upset.
@Sklivvz, I dont see why you now go after LHC questions. There is really nothing wrong with them. The ones you listed are still relevant at present and even if their should be others which are no longer completely actual, they may still be worth reading and having them around is a godd thing. They do not hurt and no actions have to be taken.
@Sklivvz the question reads again as suggesting to (rather down...?) vote, close, and even delete a whole bunch of mostly legitimate posts about a certain topic. Honestly this almost makes me vomit and wanting to leave the site (which is not that easy for me, obviously, since I once really loved Physics SE). However if the bad things I observe since about 6 weeks keep going on and are getting worse, moving on and forget about Physics SE will finally become managable :-(
@DavidZaslavsky I almost suspected something like this, as I said to Ron in a now again deleted post. Why did you not explain in a comment to Ron that it is deleted because it was in the wrong placa and that he should put it in his answer? Such a helpful comment could have been very helpful to avoid additional tension ... In fact I wanted to reread the physics again and now I cant.
@DavidZaslavsky I have read Ron's answer shortly before it was deleted. It suddenly disappeared without the sine of such a comment, which would best have been addressed at Ron. I looked for such an explaining comment why his answer was deleted, but there was none and there seems to be still none. Such a comment would have been useful for everybody who was interested in the physics, not only for Ron himself.
@DavidZaslavsky Independent from if it was there for a short time or not, such a comment would still be useful. At present none is visible, and it could still help to release tension. And I would like it if Ron would repost the physics on his main page answer. Would you delete it if I ask Ron to extend his answer on the main page?
If Ron wants to edit his answer to the relevant question on the main site to include the physics content from his meta answer, then that will of course be fine. I've already left him a comment saying that.
Very minor thing here. These two questions
How can a black hole produce sound?
Why does a window at night become a mirror?
reference each other under the "linked" sidebar. I thought that was curious, since they have nothing to do with one another. I searched both questions, and yet I could no...
