SPACE EXPLOITATION ver 2.0 hosted by Smilo

[Ecce Homo]

Smilo, have you studied physics? Otherwise, summarizing this will be a great effort...

[EnochF]

I'm not so sure. I mean, all this technobabble dickering that we're going through is, for the most part, beside the point.

For example, exactly how space elevators work is beside the point as far as gameplay goes. They're a feasible outgrowth of future technology, indeed of current technology. They would probably be a kind of city improvement that each civ would be able to build once, like a palace, but which would cost a number of shield comparable to a Wonder.

And all this back-and-forth about fusion is equally irrelevant, as the game can simply designate "fusion" as a future source of energy and be done with all the speculative details.

Quite frankly, I'm feeling like quite an ass already having taken up so much valuable bandwidth in senseless debate. And that last message I posted was inexcusable. From now on, I'll just let it all slide.

*sigh*

But you can all see that I'm right, can't you?

[Harel]

You will let it slide? oh well.
Did I say any carbon molecule has to be a cable? No. I said the most likely space elevator is a cable.
Indeed, your posted article said exactly what I said. Guessing you intended to prove me wrong, I would hush now is I were you. So sure of yourself that I will be proved wrong, you posted something without even checking it.
Indeed, there is no differnce between my post and NASA article.
But please, LET'S DO let is slide.

While it may be true that how a space elevator works is beside the point, I explained it beacuase Smilo asked for an alboration.

A small thing Enoch. I am a physics student, and a big reader and author of science fiction. You will NOT find me wrong. While I may miss-translate something, the context of everything I will say here ( and on the other posts ) is rock solid. I, for one, would not post something without checking the facts, and being very sure of what I say.
Something that you seem to fail in.

[Harel]

Not to do any "technobabble dickering", while a nano-repair system is a very good idea, if I am not mistaking SMAC allready covered that area:
while discovering some nano-tech ( SMAC had like 4-5, right? ) you gain an advantge that you can heal up your units even when outside a city.
Or I am wrong about this? ( now, now, EnochF, i know you want to jump and scream: "bloody right your wrong" but i belive I am right about this. You see? When I am not sure about something, I say it. You however, launch. )

[EnochF]

[long, long pause]

Remain perfectly calm... remain civilized...

There. Whew.

I'm going to let that one slide as well.

[smilo]

EcceHomo,

I'm an engineer so physics was part of my education, but not that big a part i'm afraid.

EnochF, Harel,
MARVELOUS, BRILLIANT. This is what CIV is all about : combine culture, science, arts and gaming. So please do continue your discussions. EnochF, don't lets thing slide by to easily, it great seeing the discussions going on.

But, it is true that this thread is becoming quite heavy and maybe missing the point a bit. There fore I'll setup another thread : the mining planets Syndicate. People can throw in ideas specifically concerning that subject. You guys can just go on in this thread. Please do, I really enjoy it.


<font size=1 color=444444>[This message has been edited by smilo (edited June 22, 1999).]</font>

[EnochF]

"A small thing Enoch. I am a physics student, and a big reader and author of science fiction. You will NOT find me wrong. While I may miss-translate something, the context of everything I will say here ( and on the other posts ) is rock solid. I, for one, would not post something without checking the facts, and being very sure of what I say."

This is not a small thing. When you mistranslate a scientific concept, the concept you present appears flawed to everyone except for you.

Here's a perfect example:

"Teleportion is done by quantum links. Photons of the same frequency are connected with an instantous link. If you tune two photons, divide them and send them to different ways, every change of one photon will INSTANTOUSLY effect the other photon, regardless of distance. FTL communction, ofcoruse can derive on this."

Now, what you're describing here is the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox. Mind you, you don't know you're talking about the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox. You call it "quantum links." Unfortunately, "quantum links" is a meaningless technobabble phrase in English. Thus, all your English readers are unaware of the validity of your essential point.

The heart of the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox has to do with the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics. This is an aspect of the behavior of subatomic particles and their wave/particle duality. It has been said that "an electron moves as a wave but arrives as a particle." This seemingly contradictory statement actually describes the behavior of a single electron. Richard Feynman has described this as "the central mystery" of quantum physics.

The famous experiment, known as the Young double-slit experiment, goes like this: Aim a beam of monochromatic light at a screen with two narrow slits. The light will pass through both slits and then expand outward as a wave. The two waves will then interfere with one another, producing an observable interference pattern on a second screen.

This is to be expected of light. There is no paradox here. Yet the experiment also works if you send a single photon of light. And even more amazingly, the experiment shows that a single electron will somehow pass through both slits in the screen and interfere with itself! As impossible as it sounds, this experiment has been found to be repeatable.

And yet, if scientists perform the experiment again, this time placing a sensor in one of the two slits, the electron will no longer interfere with itself. It will be either be detected moving through the hole or not detected, and the interference pattern will not appear. This is also repeatable.

Now, the Copenhagen Interpretation says that electrons, when unobserved, move as waves, which are called "probability waves." Whenever the particle is observed, however, the particle goes through a process which in English is referred to as "collapsing the probability wave," after which it begins to demonstrate the behavior of a particle once again. This all has to do with indeterminacy theory. The reason a single photon or electron can interfere with itself is because, as long as we cannot know which slit the photon went through, it will behave as a probability wave.

If all of this sounds like complete bull**** to you, don't worry. Einstein thought the same thing. The Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox was pointed out by Einstein in an attempt to show that it was incompatible with natural law, that it broke the laws of physics.

It goes like this. In order to collapse the probability wave of a particle, one must know its momentum and position. Now, let's say an atom emits two electrons in opposite directions. In exactly opposite directions, so that to know the vector of one is to know the vector of another. Now, we don't know their momentum or exact vectors, only that they were emitted in opposite directions. Now, we wait. The two electrons drift apart. Now, we measure the momentum and vector of one of the electrons. As soon as we observe the electron, the probability wave collapses, and the electron immediately demonstrates the behavior of a particle once again. And so, instantaneously, no matter the distance, does the other electron. This process bypasses the speed of light entirely. Einstein hated it. He referred to the process as "spooky action at a distance."

Yet it happens. Modern SF authors are convinced that this process can be used to communicate faster than light, and they're probably right, though one would have to have quite a number of entangled particles to communicate a complicated message. And if you don't speak the language, no amount of entangled electrons will make you understood.

So, just because you know what you're talking about is no guarantee that you can communicate it intelligently in an unfamiliar language.

Oh, here's another minor point:
"Well EnochF i am not refering to C.Clark 3001 odyssey super-structure."

I have no idea what you're talking about. I have never read 3001.

In the brief argument about space elevators, you seemed to have gotten the completely false impression that we were suggesting a shaft structure. I believe you latched on to a question that smilo wrote: "Is it a very tall lift shaft?" In all our subsequent discussion, it is clear to an English reader that we are talking about a cable reaching from Earth to orbit. I mentioned that using currently technology, a cable could be constructed of carbon nanotubes made of buckminsterfullerene. I was right. A strand of carbon nanotubes does in fact possess the tensile strength to construct such a cable, and theoretical engineers are in fact discussing how to go about constructing one.

If you are such a big reader of science fiction, no doubt you are aware that this is exactly the device used in The Fountains of Paradise, a novel which I actually did refer to.

I will continue to correct any information you present here that is incorrect. I don't care whether the problem lies in bad physics or bad English. I'm not out to find you wrong. But you have posted wrong information. You've done it a lot. You're still doing it. It sounds like the problem lies in translation. After all, you stated the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky paradox in such a way that I understood what you were talking about.

I've been reluctant to rant like this because I felt it would be tantamount to personal attack. I know you feel under attack from my posts. But understand this: I read what you say. I don't just automatically disagree with you just because your name is Harel. I honestly read what you say before I argue with it. I cannot read what you meant to say. If what you said is wrong -- and believe me, it often is -- then I will not accept it.

[EnochF]

Here's another quick one for Mr. "You will NOT find me wrong."

'Do you know what "neutron output" is? radiation. The defination of radio-acitivy is the radiation emmiting from fissioned uranium and the like, emmiting, among other things two neutrons, which is the passive gamma radiation.'

Sorry, but radiation comes in three types: alpha particles consist of 2 protons and 2 neutrons, i.e. helium nuclei; beta particles consist of electrons or positrons; and gamma rays consist of photons.

Also, gamma radiation does not always involve the emission of neutrons. In fact, in the proton-proton chain, the process by which the sun fuses hydrogen into helium, there is an emission of gamma rays. Neutrons are indeed emitted in the chain reactions of uranium fission. However, the emission of neutrons is not radiation.

Now, once again, as above, you are probably not wrong. However, what you wrote is. Flat out incorrect.

<font size=1 color=444444>[This message has been edited by EnochF (edited June 23, 1999).]</font>

[EnochF]

[long pause]

I'm going to let that slide, too.

[EnochF]

I just thought of a practical use of nanotechnology which would affect gameplay, in space or otherwise, I suppose, but mostly in space. The invention of nanorepair machines would mean that units would be able to heal fully in one or two turns whether they were in a city or not. Maybe "Repair Unit" could be an action, like Pillage or Wait or Bombard.

[Tornado7]

Getting back on topic, I think that the exploration and exploitation of the SOLAR SYSTEM is a good idea. You could have the option of customizing it, playing in a random one, or even creating your own, like building a map on a bigger scale.
Then, for the end of the game, instead of just going to Alpha Centauri(Let's face it, if they stick close to the storyline it kills creatitvity) you would have to devolp FTL travel and contact an alien race. Just an idea.

------------------
Truth is stranger than fiction, and people are weirder than both.

[NotLikeTea]

**Ahem**

Harel, EnochF, I think I speak on behalf of most posters here when I say that you two should shake hands and agree to disagree. The longer this lasts, the more the argument will devolve into punctuation, and what does this accomplish?

Thank you

[Harel]

Ahhh.. a part of alpha radiation? You do know that protons and neutrons are two states of the same particle, the neuclon? And that in high-tempture fusion/fission 4 neutrons can make alpha radiation ( with no electrons, or 4 electrons negeting the positive charge of the protons/neuclons ).

But, even my knowldage is limited: i suggest a look in one of the numerous sites of fusion engines on the net, which can tell you just why the deutrium/tritium fusion reaction is radio-active much better then I can.

But please, let's follow NotLikeTea suggestion.

[Harel]

EnochF, I thank you for your two constructive posts. Indeed, the lack of a spell checker and a dictionary is heartfully felt.
You do, however, need to admit that your post: "Harel: Blah blah blah you're wrong, it has to be a cable!", is very annoying, and even worse: insulting. I don't tend to ignore such insults. Even more, I just saw you said to diodoros that you were grumpy beacuase you read one of my posts. Not nice, hien?
However, I do want this to be a place for learning, to both of us and the rest of the readers. Let's let the past be by-gone, from now on, ok?

Specifcly about your posts:

* I mentioned that when you tune two photons to the same wave-length ( by passing them by a liqued prism ), they form a quantum-link ( ok, sorry, don't know a better name ), which connects the two photons in an instantous link, regardless of range.
When you send them by a fiber optic cable, any change of direction of one photon will automaticly cause the other photon to shift direction, regardless of the distance.
* No, it doesn't sound like bull**** to me ( comment of the first post )
* Einstien also said: "God doesn't play with dices". Hehe, was he wrong... :
I liked the response more: "Not only does he play with dices, he cheats too". Ok, ok, I am side-tracked.
* Another very strange anomoly: free drawing of energy from the background gravitional field. Ok, ok, I'll explain: atoms, when close by exchange photons which are created and absorbed without any energy cost. Meaning, a photon is just created without taking some energy from the electron. This is elctrodynynamics.
* Which reminds me: Smilo add another sort of engine to the next list. photon emmitor. By triggering a chain-action ( elctrodynamics is influnced by near-light kinetic speeds ). By high-accelerating particles, then holding them in a tight space ( an inertia field, maybe? ) you can create an area where photons will create without any limits ( tapping the gravitional field ).
* General knowladge: C. clark, in 3001, said that all humanity is centred in four huge sky-scrapers, each housing 250 million people. So huge it is, that it strech well beyond the rims of the stratosphere. A sort of a space elevator, just a very huge building.
I do say again: a solid shaft ( like Smilo said ) would collapse under the pressure. It needs to be elastic. And sorry, never was a big fan of Asimov so I hadne't read the foundian series much.
I highly recommand Kim stanely Robinson Mars trilogy, it has a great explantion of a space elevator, beside being a VERY good and solid hard-core SF.
* Neutron emmition is a form of radiation, and radio-active. The heavy hydrogen fusion engine is very radio-active due to neutron emmition links.

Ok, onward to Smilo challange.

* First off, about mining syndicates. Read C.J.CheerH "heavy time" nobel. While not being a favourite in my heard, it has a very good story revolving around a mining syndicate.
* Many ways to show up the astroid field. A map, a planet, city, etc. Here is what I suggest.
The process of mining is like this:
* Tracking an astroid.
* Mapping the composition.
* Drilling/Dragging the astroid to a refinary.
* Sending from rifanry back to Earth.

You will have a map, maybe like 32x32, not very big. You need to have four types of ship:
* Builder ship: builds your refinaries.
* Geologist ship: analyse possible useful astroid for chemical composition.
* Drill ship: breaks down the astroid, then haul it back to a refinary.
* Frieght ship: move minerals back to Earth.

MOVEMENT inside the belt always has a hazardous possiblity. Defined by your tracking tech, any moving ship has a change to be destroied by a fast astroid.

The map is dark, until a geolosit pass by the area and press "S" for scout. After one turn, the tile is now showing an astroid. Sending a drill and press "M". A drill can have up to 10 loads, and a single tile can have between 1-15 loads. Move back to the refinary. The refinary can transform up to 5 loads per turn ( maybe more ). They are repsented by blue shields at that base. Use a freight ship to pick them up ( up to 25 loads in one ship ). Press "E" for the freigth ship to move to Earth ( time is 5-15 turns, defined by your engine tech ).

Possible extra buildings:
* Radars: have a line-of-sight, in which ships have no chance to be destroied.
* Laser beams - ships in line-of-sight move twice faster.

I'll think about this some more later.

[EnochF]

"Neutron emmition is a form of radiation, and radio-active."

Which "form" of radiation is neutron emission? Alpha, beta or gamma? Or have you discovered a new form of radiation unknown to the rest of the scientific community?