Neil

general recent conversations

Discussion on question by kingledion:…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Sep 18, 2018 18:47

@Renan On the contrary, I think it is a very reasonable question. If we're just excusing away everything as being fantasy and "anything can happen", then why ask the question at all? Give them wings and let them collect the minerals using fairy dust.

Neil

Sep 18, 2018 18:47

Is there any particular reason why it must be the sides or the bottom? Can they not mine the rock like any mining crew? They would only need the entrance to dedicate for the task, no more.

Discussion on question by Foolish: On…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:32

Though the show wasn't bad if I wasn't taking it too seriously that is :)

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:31

Well I'm going to have to go with the books for sure

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:27

his books are fantasy genre, but they take place in the far future after an unknown apocalypse

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:26

There are dwarves, elves, gnomes, you name it, and they all evolved genetically

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:26

You should look into The Shannara Chronicles by Terry Brooks

Neil

Jul 31, 2018 09:25

Discussion between Schwern and Neil

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 09:08

Even a simulation of an alien world imposes basic rules. If you forced your CPU to subtract a number rather than add it, the computer wouldn't even start. You'd be lucky if it didn't start smoking ;)

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 09:07

You'd be hard pressed to prove that a universe could exist without the same rules, but even if it could, you'd have to still have rules which make sense

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 09:06

If you were simulating a ball rolling across the pavement and it suddenly leaped several thousand kilometers to the complete opposite side of the universe, it wouldn't be a very good simulation, but admittedly, it would still be a simulation of our world

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 09:01

In such a simulation, you'd never see a simulation actually use this in calculations. If the program is written properly, the numbers being added should never exceed that maximum number.

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 09:00

Granted, you would see the number drop negative when adding one to it, but as you mentioned, it is a limitation of the machine.

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 07:24

Every program you've ever written runs in a world where adding 1 can get you a lower number. I beg to differ. Maybe if you had some links you could show? Those "simulations" you describe are simulating how gravity might form galaxies. That's based on the very simple and very observed formula F=MA. It's hardly simulating alien life forms, I assure you.

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 07:24

I'm a programmer by trade, and to my knowledge, we have yet to simulate any universe, much less one where adding 1 to something resulted in a smaller number. Though I welcome links suggesting the contrary. I appreciate that you're expanding on possibilities, but if we started an argument with "Lets assume true=false", if you accepted that assumption, anything afterwards is both true and false. It would be ludicrous. Similarly, if you allow adding 1 to something to be less than the original number, then it is equally ludicrous.

Neil

Jul 19, 2018 07:24

I don't think you could accurately determine anything regarding a universe where adding 1 to something didn't result in a bigger number, but I believe the OP is referring to the same universe (and therefore same rules of physics). Even if you think the physics is different in another part of the universe, it makes all discussions on the matter pointless just the same. Also OP was asking specifically about math, not about physics. One precludes the other perhaps, but lets not start claiming that they're one and the same.

Discussion on question by ScienceKean…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Feb 19, 2018 17:29

Open the pod bay doors, Hal, anyone? Your story has remarkable similarities to 2001 a space odyssey.

Discussion on answer by Yurgen: How t…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Feb 13, 2018 21:35

@JamesTrotter They have rivers to produce the electricity. To make the tools necessary to build a mill, they burn wood to smelt metal. I don't really see the difficulty here.

Neil

Feb 13, 2018 21:35

Well conceivably they would discover electricity (out of necessity) faster than we did, and this may result in a faster evolution, not a slower one.

Discussion on question by Cognisant: …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Jan 22, 2018 03:03

If you want an unbiased ruler, you might consider the possibility of having a sort of technocracy where an AI rules the country. That would still be somewhat difficult as the programmers would have to create it without bias, but at least you remove the human element once it exists.

Neil

Jan 22, 2018 03:03

@Burki The caretakers, the only source of interaction the king would have, would rule whether they realize it or not. If all the caretakers happen to think some foreign country should be invaded and plundered, the king would literally have no concept of resistance against these suggestions and would think so as well.

Discussion on answer by Erik Eidt: Is…

Imported from a comment discussion on softwareengineering.stac...

Neil

Dec 1, 2017 13:31

@Utku I worked for a software house that had a code generation tool designed to create partial classes for any and all CRUD operations for a given table. Could they have just used a Dictionary with field name / value? Yes of course, but they preferred to have actual extendable classes with basic functionality. Given that the fields changed, this would have been impossible to do without at least heavily relying on reflection, which is risky in of itself. Call it a shortcoming of C#, but I thought it was rather clever solution that didn't rely on reflection.

Discussion on question by akaioi: Psy…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Nov 24, 2017 21:32

It's difficult to try to understand the side effects of not having your mouth in your head because no such animals exist. Maybe there's a reason for this. Perhaps having your brain so close to your mouth makes the difference between catching your prey and just missing it (takes roughly 400ms for a signal to traverse from the brain to the feet). So something else to consider.. maybe you'd have a predator that is more wreckless but a little slower in reaction times.

Discussion on question by Jen: Rainbo…

Imported from a comment discussion on physics.stackexchange.co...

Neil

May 9, 2016 18:45

@MitchellPorter Don't lose a half a day's work on my behalf, I was merely sharing my idea. Though I don't believe that the orbit would have to be perfectly circular, meaning that while the light has to hit precisely, it isn't that improbable. In other words, there would be a zone where there would be lots of photons orbiting, not a very precise shell. In the middle, you would likely be hit the hardest with photons.

Neil

May 9, 2016 18:45

@MitchellPorter We're talking about big numbers here, so an improbable precise entry of light to prevent it from exiting or getting sucked into the black hole is also amplified over a long time. We may never really know the truth, but I suspect light orbiting a black hole would probably obey the same rules of orbiting bodies around a star, except accelerated. As it stands now, it would take a long time for any one of our planets to plummet into the sun through orbital decay, so I imagine there would be quite a buildup of photons around a black hole.

Neil

May 9, 2016 18:45

There is a thin section of the photon sphere that when hit at the right angle with light will continue to orbit the black hole for potentially millions of years. Accumulate all the light from the stars since the birth of the black hole, and you end up with what would be a quantity of light that would, in the best case scenario, blind you instantly from the sheer amount of light hitting your eye. The worst case scenario is a bit too gruesome to mention on this site. This is assuming that you have somehow managed to not be spaghettified before reaching the event horizon.

Neil

May 9, 2016 18:45

That said, should you see a color before being brutally blinded by the light, my guess is the answer would be "white and burny".

Discussion on question by kpv: What i…

Imported from a comment discussion on physics.stackexchange.co...

Neil

Apr 14, 2016 09:36

@WordsLikeJared He may yet still be alive. The aliens have him captured and living comfortably with Elvis Presley. Joking aside, the problem with hypotheticals is that they are just that. Though if you were claiming were true, that would imply that it would have been two black holes whose combined weight after the creation of energy would have been enough to generate the entire universe. What happened to the other matter that was around long enough to create the black holes prior? Wouldn't we find something of that?

Discussion on answer by slebetman: Ri…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Jun 6, 2015 21:36

From a computer scientist standpoint, computing anything in 1ns means simulating universes in real time, quite possibly a universe which contains computers which themselves perform calculations. It's a paradox, of course, but that doesn't make it any less cool to think about.

Discussion on answer by Cort Ammon: R…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

Jun 6, 2015 09:18

@ratchetfreak I see what you mean, though he did use the word computer and not turning machine, so I have to assume that means that unless otherwise stated, it is as a normal computer (or supercomputer if you prefer).

Neil

Jun 6, 2015 09:18

@ratchetfreak But this is what we've been given. A computer that can run any program in 1 ns or less, despite any possible program you could write. Essentially it's a paradox. Though I would like to meet the poor schmuck that puts an unhalting program to see what happens only to cause the fastest computer in the world which cannot be opened to loop endlessly. "Oops.. I guess I'll go grab a box to put my office supplies in..."

Discussion on question by MBurke: Tom…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

May 30, 2015 10:28

Imagine what aliens might discover if they landed the day after "groundhog day" (assuming this phenomenon affected only the earth). They'd see a growing civilization and then on one random day, the world's population going batsh*t crazy and decimating themselves. They'd be baffled for centuries to come.

Discussion on answer by Jimmy360: Esc…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

May 28, 2015 02:12

This would be a horrible option if you cared about those living on the planet, but well, that doesn't apply in this case, so it actually isn't a bad idea.

Discussion on answer by Dan Smolinske…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

May 12, 2015 17:49

@lyle You would almost certainly see a hybrid machine of some sort in much the same way that airline pilots fly without having direct control over the flaps. The AI would do just about everything except make the decisions.

Discussion on question by dsollen: Ho…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...

Neil

May 12, 2015 17:47

I should add that human fighters vs enemy AI fighters would make a very interesting dynamic in your story. In a way, you're proving in your story why human fighters would ultimately be superior because the protagonists win. It would also make the enemy seem inhuman and intimidating.

Neil

May 12, 2015 17:47

I think it is enough that the big wigs responsible for the construction of such machinery would recall a particularly nasty event caused by the use of AI. In other words, AI might be better in many ways, but either due to a bug or a miscalculation (I wouldn't say AI went crazy), there were many casualties. As such, they decide to stick with humans. An example might be that an enemy fleet was expected to arrive, and the enemy knew this and released hostages disguised somewhat like the enemy. AI blew them out of the water so to speak.

The Whiteboard

General Discussion for softwareengineering.stackexchange.com P...

Neil

Oct 4, 2013 08:43

Find a registry key that you don't like? BLAST IT TO HELL! You OWN the operating system afterall

Neil

Oct 4, 2013 08:43

I can understand if install and uninstall programs made by non-Microsoft companies don't work. What blows my mind everytime is the fact that MICROSOFT SQL Server freezes upon uninstall.

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:33

Got to run, sorry

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:31

I'd never heard of it until now, so I'm not sure if it is already popular or what

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:31

@MichaelT The idea has a lot of potential

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:30

Maybe that is a bit young though

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:29

I'd be more interested in the programming aspect

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:27

@MichaelT Best. Brother. Ever.

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 16:04

@MichaelT I don't use Python, but making fun of Python is always fun

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 15:52

Hard to find

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 15:52

@MichaelT Well still.. great dental package..

Neil

Oct 3, 2013 15:50

@MichaelT Sure, maybe they'll kill you if you don't do your job properly, but you'll lose your great dental package

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

Neil

May 15, 2013 10:38

Yes, I love my coffee

Neil

May 15, 2013 10:37

I think it's better to handle singular items with an array, even if it is plural