Stack Exchange
log in

Samuel

 Discussion on answer by Ville Niemi: …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
May 3, 2018 10:15
@Kevin Just basic insecurity. I doubt it's much more complex than that. Religious beliefs are presented as known facts about the world, but are clearly not believed to the same degree as other facts. If I tell you gravity is an illusion you laugh it off because that's just silly. But, if I tell you god isn't real, it's upsetting. Shouldn't both challenges be seen as equally inconsequential if you're equally secure in the truth of each? Clearly one of these facts is not like the other.
 

 Discussion on question by OneSurvivor…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Apr 26, 2018 12:03
You mean if this thing was fired right next to my high gain microphone, I wouldn't hear anything from the attached speakers?
 

 Discussion on question by Amut: Can a…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Mar 2, 2018 21:10
Related.
 

 Discussion on question by Abhinav Did…

Imported from a comment discussion on electronics.stackexchang...
Samuel
Feb 9, 2018 16:37
@AbhinavDiddee In the end the real answer is: you don't need to correct her. If it's for a grade, then fight it, but if it's a lecture mistake, just move on. If it's just for the sake of being right, you're not going to gain anything by proving it.
Samuel
Feb 9, 2018 16:37
Ask if Ohm's law is broken in this "special" case.
 

 Discussion on question by kingledion:…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Feb 7, 2018 16:45
Can you have people worshiping a god that hasn't been born yet? Perhaps people will one day believe that we will create a new god in the form of an artificial super intelligence.
 

 Discussion on question by JBH: Worldb…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Feb 2, 2018 12:26
@JBH The easiest stepping stone would be to use a smooth Earth and diverge from there. Stopping the rotation, something that exists on all planets we can observe climate on, complicates the issue rather than simplifies it.
Samuel
Feb 2, 2018 12:26
@JBH If you think the answer for a perfectly circular orbit and a orbit with an eccentricity of ~0.0167, then you better fix the Sun's output too, it's not perfectly constant after all.
Samuel
Feb 2, 2018 12:26
"DOES NOT rotate, DOES NOT orbit" - That's effectively the same thing as rotating once per orbit. That is, your situation is the same for a tidally locked Earth-turned-billiard-ball.
 

 Discussion on question by zompz: Stor…

Imported from a comment discussion on scifi.stackexchange.com/...
Samuel
Oct 20, 2017 13:36
I just got an email from Google+ suggesting I read this question.
 

 Discussion on question by TrEs-2b: Ho…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Mar 3, 2017 02:44
@GrimmTheOpiner The sidereal day is longer, not the solar day, which was Michael's question/comment. This question is about solar days, is it not?
Samuel
Mar 3, 2017 02:44
@GrimmTheOpiner While correct in one interpretation of "day" it's incorrect in the context of this question. A point on the Venusian surface sees about half of a Venusian year of daylight. Not more than a year.
 

 Discussion on question by dot_Sp0T: W…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Feb 12, 2017 18:58
Most of this is covered here.
 

 Discussion on question by TGar: What …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Jan 24, 2017 00:44
These people wouldn't even have language. What's the use in talking about things everyone can see immediately in front of themselves? The problem with this concept is you've started with a fully formed society, then removed a characteristic required to form a society. You may as well ask what gloves for worms would look like.
 

 Discussion on answer by Durakken: Can…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Jan 5, 2017 19:45
@Durakken I am specifically looking for an analysis of the material. To quote from my question "An answer of "the material needs to be, like, wicked strong and lightweight, dude" is not satisfactory. I want to know what materials will work (and calculations showing why), or if none exist, what materials would be required (and calculations showing why)." Similarly and answer of "I just picked the lightest and strongest said to exist." is no good without some numbers to back it up.
Samuel
Jan 5, 2017 19:45
This is significantly improved from the initial answer. Nice work! The initial question goes unanswered though, you do mention a structural material, but it appears that it's quite squishy thus not suitable for ~150m rigid structural members. Can you expand on what materials would be used for structure and why solar radiation/greenhouse effect won't be enough for proper heating?
Samuel
Jan 5, 2017 19:45
You're getting ahead of yourself. This question is asking what materials and then what's the carrying capacity. There is no city. We can't add a city and/or people until we know what the carrying capacity of the sphere is. Nowhere in the question does it say there is also a city of unspecified size and mass. It says Fuller wanted to use them for habitats. How many people is that? It could be 1 person in a tent. But I'm not even asking for that, I'm only asking for carrying capacity. Discard your assumptions, read the question, then edit or delete your answer.
Samuel
Jan 5, 2017 19:45
No other answers actually answer what I'm asking, which is what materials and from that, how much carrying capacity. If I could provide those, my question wouldn't be a question. Residency will be based on the answer to the latter question. Read the question again, those parts have been in bold the entire time. How does a 20% increase in volume increase the mass by more than 100%? Are you changing the density of something? I'm starting to think you either misunderstand the question or lack the education to consider it properly.
 

 Discussion on question by Tiny TrEs-2…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 23, 2016 03:38
@HDE226868 Possible duplicate of (certainly related to) Krikkit.
 

 Discussion on answer by Bellerophon: …

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 22, 2016 15:54
@kingledion Well the church always counts dates weirdly. For example if you got stuck in an elevator on Friday afternoon and got out on Sunday morning I'd say you were in there for maybe two days, but the church would say that was three days. Plus, they never have a zero index. That's my three points anyway.
Samuel
Dec 22, 2016 15:54
@kingledion That source is claiming there is no intentional link to pagan celebrations because "early Christian writers never hint at any recent calendrical engineering". Of course, they wouldn't write about such motivations, would they? As you mention, it goes on to say "From the mid-fourth century on, we do find Christians deliberately adapting and Christianizing pagan festivals." while admitting that as late as the mid 3rd century there was no record of Christmas being celebrated. Given the sparse information, it's conceivable that the date was an early example of pagan festival adoption.
Samuel
Dec 22, 2016 15:54
@kingledion Bellerophon is correct. The Greeks' celebration emphasized the baptism of Jesus hence the Jan. 6th date. Further: " Various factors contributed to the selection of December 25 as a date of celebration: it was the date of the winter solstice on the Roman calendar; it was about nine months after March 25, the date of the vernal equinox and a date linked to the conception of Jesus; and it was the date of a Roman pagan festival in honor of the Sun god Sol Invictus."
 

 Discussion on question by Pavel Janic…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 21, 2016 04:39
I don't think it's going to be a thing people do in zero-g. Both because of the lack of gravity causing more persistent clouds and the fact that to be in zero-g means your environment is highly regulated and most likely fragile.
 

 Discussion on question by Zxyrra: Wha…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 15, 2016 01:53
@Zxyrra I was alluding that since green isn't included in the Planckian locus, you're going to have a lot of trouble finding something that radiates green.
Samuel
Dec 15, 2016 01:53
Find a metal that glows green in some stage when it's heated and you'll have found something to make a star glow green as well.
 

 Discussion on answer by Pete: Why are…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 9, 2016 20:57
@Noldor130884 Wouldn't that basically be the chef's job?
Samuel
Dec 9, 2016 20:57
This is covered in this comic strip.
 

 Discussion on answer by Separatrix: N…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@hobbs You must interpret the sentence "Their compression and encoding has progressed past the point where we can identify it as a coherent signal." differently than I do. Because it seems to indicate we get the signal but don't have the technology to comprehend it.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@JohnColanduoni My point remains. Whether it's a purely binary environment or spherical cows, the real world situation isn't being described accurately.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@Shalvenay It really doesn't matter. Even DSSS is sent out at a power significantly higher than ambient noise. It's clearly distinguishable as a signal from the noise. With multiple, non-periodic, signals coming from a star, no matter how noisy would not appear to be a natural occurrence and we would infer a sender. Of course, the obvious answer is we never receive the signals at a sufficient power, but that's not in this answer. This answer assumes the signals arrive, but we don't have the technology to detect them, which is implausible at best.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@hobbs Precisely. A signal as I just described would infer a civilization, because natural radio emitter doesn't look anything like a signal suitable for radio communications/broadcasts. If the situation you described arises, that is "okay, I see there's an emitter" then it's not an acceptable solution.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@hobbs I think you understand the question differently. Mistakenly, I believe. The question is not about interpretation of the signal, but reception. The OP is asking how to avoid detection, not how to avoid successful interpretation. Any signal suitable for transmission and reception will look significantly different than hydrogen clouds. That is, if we detected it we'd know it was not a natural emission, regardless of knowing the content. The OP is asking how to avoid that detection all together.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@hobbs Your interpretation of my tone is incorrect. I know of no way to convince you of that as long as you have that bias. So please discard it and re-evaluate.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@Delioth Do note that you are able to apply your "decompression algorithm" to CodeGolf data because it's being delivered to you via the low entropy communication system known as the Internet. Transmitting high entropy data at the same amplitude as noise can not be expected to be received reliably by anyone. Remember that the receiver gets both the noise and the signal, so obviously, being indistinguishable means they won't be able to tell the difference.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
Or think of it this way if you want a computer science version. Compress your data to the point that you have maximized entropy and it appears random. Now, to simulate a real world effect of radio broadcast, randomly flip a small percentage of your bits. Did that level of compression help you or hurt you? It seems to me that you sacrificed all error detection/correction for the sake of compression. Of course, if the analogy followed the proposed system of being indistinguishable from noise (SNR = 0) you would randomly flip all your bits.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@CemKalyoncu, JohnColanduoni, and Delioth Compression induced entropy is not the same thing as noise in this case. You're all coming at this from a computer science perspective of binary values, if only two values are possible, I don't disagree with your assertions. However, for the real world and for a radio broadcast, a signal and noise are very different things. A radio signal which is indistinguishable from noise is not a signal, it's noise. Read up on something you don't have in your purley binary environments called "signal to noise ratio" or SNR.
Samuel
Dec 6, 2016 01:36
@CemKalyoncu No, it's not going to look like noise at all. If your signal is indistinguishable from noise, you won't be able to distinguish it from the noise. Which is exactly not the point when sending a signal. It will look highly ordered.
 

 Discussion on question by Zxyrra: Are…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 1, 2016 16:06
@Zxyrra For clarity, the concept doesn't require that the substance is a polymorph of water. Cool breezes can be generated in a plethora of ways that begin with a "detonation".
Samuel
Dec 1, 2016 16:06
@Zxyrra Well, this particular polymorph for water isn't known to exist (and likely can't). But the concept is not "handwavium". Of course, the way your question is worded, a cool breeze would qualify.
Samuel
Dec 1, 2016 16:06
I'm surprised nobody mentioned Ice-Nine, the substance in Kurt Vonnegut's novel Cat's Cradle, which causes people and water to freeze by raising the freezing temperature significantly.
 

 Discussion on answer by Euphoric: Mil…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Samuel
Dec 1, 2016 16:06
@RogerWillcocks No, it's not. I can't tell if you're asking a question. It's certainly not obvious enough to be rhetorical. We currently use drones in combat, how many have turned against us by our enemies?
Samuel
Dec 1, 2016 16:06
A manned tank is significantly easier to be pressed into service by an enemy if captured. A whole lot of reverse engineering would be required before an enemy could control a drone tank, assuming it doesn't brick itself after a lost connection timeout.
 

 The Factory Floor

Main chat room for worldbuilding.stackexchange.com
6
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 20:14
@bowlturner We could down vote it for you.
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 20:12
@DaaaahWhoosh Good by at least one metric.
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 20:09
@DaaaahWhoosh That's an absolute statement
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 20:09
The real answer seemed to be "RTFM"
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 20:08
I like the hole depth one.
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 17:11
Ah ok, sorry didn't read far enough back.
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 17:11
The five sense things is non-sense. You have different nerve receptors for pressure, hot, cold, light touch, etc.
Samuel
Feb 26, 2016 17:10
@AndreiROM They're difference receptors.