Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Vocenae]

Realistically speaking, of course. Remember that so long as you clear it with your RP partner and do not abuse it to the level of godmodding, then if the story demands a wanky stealth space weapon for that story only, then it would be marginally more acceptable.

[Feazanthia]

Realistically speaking, of course. Remember that so long as you clear it with your RP partner and do not abuse it to the level of godmodding, then if the story demands a wanky stealth space weapon for that story only, then it would be marginally more acceptable.

Basically this.

Sorry. "Stealth" is my trigger word.

[SquareDisc City]

Darnit. And there was me thinking a mass driver would be good for propelling a stealthlow observability spaceship.

[Oppressorion]

Darnit. And there was me thinking a mass driver would be good for propelling a stealthlow observability spaceship.

You could use a SCIENCE heat sink and eject that?

[Otagia]

Darnit. And there was me thinking a mass driver would be good for propelling a stealthlow observability spaceship.

You could use a SCIENCE heat sink and eject that?

If you're shooting off heat sinks, they're going to be an awful lot hotter than the local environment.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Assuming that the Moon has a good deal of habitation places (Like bubbles or whatever is commonly seen in Sci Fi)

And Assuming Mars is similar but is also being constantly terraformed and is almost possible to breath outside.

How many people could you fit on both at a comfortable level (Not too many to where overcrowding could be a problem.)

[Avenio]

Assuming that the Moon has a good deal of habitation places (Like bubbles or whatever is commonly seen in Sci Fi)

And Assuming Mars is similar but is also being constantly terraformed and is almost possible to breath outside.

How many people could you fit on both at a comfortable level (Not too many to where overcrowding could be a problem.)

A little under 3.5 trillion if you pack them shoulder-to-shoulder for the Moon and 12.9 trillion for Mars, assuming a little bit of elbow room is given in arranging the people.

[Vorkova]

Assuming that the Moon has a good deal of habitation places (Like bubbles or whatever is commonly seen in Sci Fi)

And Assuming Mars is similar but is also being constantly terraformed and is almost possible to breath outside.

How many people could you fit on both at a comfortable level (Not too many to where overcrowding could be a problem.)

A little under 3.5 trillion if you pack them shoulder-to-shoulder for the Moon and 12.9 trillion for Mars, assuming a little bit of elbow room is given in arranging the people.

Trillion?

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

A little under 3.5 trillion if you pack them shoulder-to-shoulder for the Moon and 12.9 trillion for Mars, assuming a little bit of elbow room is given in arranging the people.

Trillion?

The answer also avoids the condition of comfortable placing :/

[The Legion of War]

So, I have a new question regarding ideologies and time eras. In the medieval ages, monarchies were quite common. During the fights of independence of the various colonies of various empires, we saw Democracies take hold. In the interwar (WWI and WWII) era we saw the rise of Fascist regimes. During the Cold War we saw the spread of Communism.

So at the FT level, would the level of tech and many years of progression have any sort of profound effect on previous ideologies?


See, I was thinking of possibly writing up some sort of doctrine for my nation's belief. While a authoritarian regime, I've often wondered if being a space faring nation would change many of the ideas held by previous authoritarian regimes.

Of course, this is could apply to a democratic FT nation if they think about possible changes due to the nature of FT.

So to summarize:

1) Does being at an FT level profoundly change any ideologies?

2) If so, why and how?

NOTE: I am well aware that for alien species, the development of ideologies could be radically different.

[Themiclesia]

So, I have a new question regarding ideologies and time eras. In the medieval ages, monarchies were quite common. During the fights of independence of the various colonies of various empires, we saw Democracies take hold. In the interwar (WWI and WWII) era we saw the rise of Fascist regimes. During the Cold War we saw the spread of Communism.

So at the FT level, would the level of tech and many years of progression have any sort of profound effect on previous ideologies?


See, I was thinking of possibly writing up some sort of doctrine for my nation's belief. While a authoritarian regime, I've often wondered if being a space faring nation would change many of the ideas held by previous authoritarian regimes.

Of course, this is could apply to a democratic FT nation if they think about possible changes due to the nature of FT.

So to summarize:

1) Does being at an FT level profoundly change any ideologies?

I would imagine so. A great number of politically influential ideologies had to do with the distribution of economic resource. In the middle ages, feudalism kept most people from starvation, but it kept people from becoming more productive and entrepreneuring as well. The frequent wars in Europe required a system whereby land could be worked by a large number of people spread out evenly across large territories. Mercantilism was based on the ideology that economic resource on earth was finite; the acquisition thereof by one state would necessarily, then, be at the expense of another state.

2) If so, why and how?

NOTE: I am well aware that for alien species, the development of ideologies could be radically different.

Because under our MT imagination, each person really has a limit as to how much energy and goods and services he could consume in a given time period, without being consciously wasteful. In a typical FT setting, production would be much more efficient and less-labour intensive than today; each person would engage in production less frequently and in turn spend more time consuming the products of production. Greater economic resource at the disposition of an individual generally means greater personal power, and the FT ideology may be customized to permit for this leisurely lifestyle. In parts of the world today, subsistence is still a major issue; in major centres of civilization in FT, subsistence should no longer be a problem, and (theoretically) none should ever go hungry just because he is not working. Note that all this happens generally under the presumption of peace, as war in FT would likely be even more resource-consuming than in any other technology level.

[SquareDisc City]

Assuming that the Moon has a good deal of habitation places (Like bubbles or whatever is commonly seen in Sci Fi)

And Assuming Mars is similar but is also being constantly terraformed and is almost possible to breath outside.

How many people could you fit on both at a comfortable level (Not too many to where overcrowding could be a problem.)

It largely depends on how tall (and deep, if you go underground) you want to build. Also a factor is whether you want to be self-sufficient, and if so how your agriculture is done; there's obviously a limit on photosynthesis from sunlight, though that might be exceeded by using artificial lighting from plentiful power, or even outright synthesis of foodstuffs.

So, I have a new question regarding ideologies and time eras. In the medieval ages, monarchies were quite common. During the fights of independence of the various colonies of various empires, we saw Democracies take hold. In the interwar (WWI and WWII) era we saw the rise of Fascist regimes. During the Cold War we saw the spread of Communism.

So at the FT level, would the level of tech and many years of progression have any sort of profound effect on previous ideologies?

Political institutions and ideologies can be pretty durable. Democracy, though it's gone in and out of fashion and varied a lot in the details, has been around for over two millennia. Religions are incredibly durable and often influence political systems; witness the number of jurisdictions worldwide that follow Sharia. Britain and America both kept their political institutions through the massive technological advances of the 19th and 20th centuries; again, there were some changes, but no total upheavel like say France or Russia experienced.

[Avenio]

So, I have a new question regarding ideologies and time eras. In the medieval ages, monarchies were quite common. During the fights of independence of the various colonies of various empires, we saw Democracies take hold. In the interwar (WWI and WWII) era we saw the rise of Fascist regimes. During the Cold War we saw the spread of Communism.

So at the FT level, would the level of tech and many years of progression have any sort of profound effect on previous ideologies?

I don't think we can definitively say what the effects of technological advancement and the passage of time are on a given civilization. All we have, at the moment, is a sample size of one, and our opinions of how political ideologies progress and how history unfolds is necessarily coloured by our own ideological and historical biases.

[The Akasha Colony]

Assuming that the Moon has a good deal of habitation places (Like bubbles or whatever is commonly seen in Sci Fi)

And Assuming Mars is similar but is also being constantly terraformed and is almost possible to breath outside.

How many people could you fit on both at a comfortable level (Not too many to where overcrowding could be a problem.)

"Comfortable" is subjective. It depends on culture and background. There are a lot of people who would find the typical American city to be cramped and uncomfortable, even though American urban abodes tend to be larger than their European counterparts, to say nothing of Asia.

But generally, as others have mentioned, if you're taking basically all available land area and considering it habitable, and build it to urban density, you're looking at space for trillions. Obviously, this would leave little room for agriculture and such. But it could be done.

[Otagia]

Assuming you want to populate the moon to, say, the level of Japan (836 per square mile, which isn't a huge amount but leaves a good deal of space for life support and industrial areas such as He3 mining), you could fit about 12.2 billion people. You could probably fit up to twice that amount easily, especially given how easy you could build skyscrapers given a lack of atmosphere (and thus wind) and low gravity. Heck, if we want the density of Hong Kong and coat the thing in sky scrapers of various sorts, you could reach a total population of 256.37 billion humans. The only thing you'd really need would be some sort of orbital defense satellites to shoot down incoming asteroids, which will otherwise turn your entire colony into swiss cheese rather quickly.

As for Mars, that's a bit tetchier. Assuming you actually are terraforming it, population density is going to be a good amount lower than, say, the moon. Mars has a surface area of 55.91 million square miles, so if we look at the same Japan-equivalent density you get a total population of 46.74 billion human-equivalent sophonts. In this case, going higher is probably unlikely, as you want to maintain a certain percentage of the landscape for oxygen production, oceans, and other terraforming related features.

[Auman]

It's not binding on anyone. Think of it as a FT version of the League of Nations; highminded intentions but pretty much never gets shit done and most people, including the attendees, ignore it.

The only thing the GA has ever been good for is hilarity.

A host got drunk and shot a Russian in the leg once. Then the next one got invaded by Persians and all the delegates had to fight off teh evulz. It's always good fun to show up to a GA meeting.

Hosting is hard... The stress got to him. Russians deserve to be shot.

Anyway, the Galactic Assembly was meant from the get go to be ineffectual. It wasn't supposed to have binding agreements or edicts or anything of that nature. It was quite simply a place for the galaxy to assemble and talk about things. You showed up, brought up an issue and if people felt it was important, they'd talk about it. Sometimes the issues weren't as important to some people and bourbon was consumed, things got heated and there may have been an accident.

[Red Talons]

The only thing the GA has ever been good for is hilarity.

A host got drunk and shot a Russian in the leg once. Then the next one got invaded by Persians and all the delegates had to fight off teh evulz. It's always good fun to show up to a GA meeting.

Hosting is hard... The stress got to him. Russians deserve to be shot.

Anyway, the Galactic Assembly was meant from the get go to be ineffectual. It wasn't supposed to have binding agreements or edicts or anything of that nature. It was quite simply a place for the galaxy to assemble and talk about things. You showed up, brought up an issue and if people felt it was important, they'd talk about it. Sometimes the issues weren't as important to some people and bourbon was consumed, things got heated and there may have been an accident.

Accidentally shot in the face... He was asking for it.

Butyeah, the GA was supposed to be a satire representation of a SPACE! world assembly. You know, buncha nations send talking heads, lots of yelling happens and most of the time nothing gets done. Then everyone laughs about it in the after party where the real diplomatic talks happen.

[Canuckland]

If you think about it, Humans are pretty scary.

We can keep fighting for hours after any injury, removing limbs won't fatally injure us if we can quickly patch it up and put pressure on it, we reproduce once a year, we have over 30 bones in our mouth and powerful jaw muscles, our bites are hard and in some cases, can cause infections, we project bioweapons from our bodies. We use improvised weapons from nearly anything we can get our hands on, and get extensive training to improve our motions to inflict major harm. Our endurance, shock resistance, ability to recover from injury are absurd compared to other animals even on Earth. There is evidence that our ancestors would out-walk our prey without sleep or rest, until the animal died of exhaustion. There is only one animal capable of keeping up with us: Dogs. Which we have domesticated and are known as best friends. Think about it! We don't even have to use weapons in some cases. We just have to merely show up and follow our prey. We are intelligent enough to follow you just by faded prints, feces, fur and feathers.

Now to compare ourselves to a species that didn't have to work against a larger predator:

Our speed and strength alone aren't anything to write home about, but we don't need that. We just need to outlast whatever we are fighting. And by any other species (on earth) standards, we don't get tired. Where a simple broken leg will cause any species on earth to go into shock and die, we can recover from virtually any non-immediate fatal injury. Even traumatic dismemberment isn't a career ending injury for a human. We heal from injuries rapidly, recovering in days or weeks, where an animal would take months or even years. The results aren't pretty - humans have hyperactive scare tissue, among our other survival oriented skills - but they are highly functional. Speaking of scarring, look at our medical science. We developed surgery before rudimentary anaesthetics or life-support. In extremes, humans have been known to perform surgery on themselves and survive. We regard routine medical surgeries procedures what other species would consider murder. We even perform radical surgeries for purely cosmetic reasons.

When our jaws have too many teeth in them, we have been accustomed to welding metal to our teeth and force the bones in our jaw to reconstruct over the course of years, and then continue to weld metal into our mouth to keep them there.

And by god, we will eat anything.

We will season our foods with borderline toxic peppers. We expose ourselves to potentially deadly solar radiation in pursuit of darker skin. We risk hearing loss to listen to loud noise in rhythms we enjoy. We have games where we watch two people in an arena and hit one another until one of them passes out/time runs out. We willingly jump from high altitudes and place our trust in cloth to float down to the ground. Our response to natural disasters is to rebuild what we had there in the same place. We climb to extreme heights, risking freezing to death, for mere bragging rights. We invented Dogs to help us hunt for animals. We took our one-time predators and domesticated them. Our planet is filled with deadly predators, both in the sky, in the sea, under and on ground. Yet we managed to advance further than all of them, and we want to advance further all the time.

Humans are just plain scary.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

If you think about it, Humans are pretty scary.

We can keep fighting for hours after any injury, removing limbs won't fatally injure us if we can quickly patch it up and put pressure on it, we reproduce once a year, we have over 30 bones in our mouth and powerful jaw muscles, our bites are hard and in some cases, can cause infections, we project bioweapons from our bodies. We use improvised weapons from nearly anything we can get our hands on, and get extensive training to improve our motions to inflict major harm. Our endurance, shock resistance, ability to recover from injury are absurd compared to other animals even on Earth. There is evidence that our ancestors would out-walk our prey without sleep or rest, until the animal died of exhaustion. There is only one animal capable of keeping up with us: Dogs. Which we have domesticated and are known as best friends. Think about it! We don't even have to use weapons in some cases. We just have to merely show up and follow our prey. We are intelligent enough to follow you just by faded prints, feces, fur and feathers.

Now to compare ourselves to a species that didn't have to work against a larger predator:

Our speed and strength alone aren't anything to write home about, but we don't need that. We just need to outlast whatever we are fighting. And by any other species (on earth) standards, we don't get tired. Where a simple broken leg will cause any species on earth to go into shock and die, we can recover from virtually any non-immediate fatal injury. Even traumatic dismemberment isn't a career ending injury for a human. We heal from injuries rapidly, recovering in days or weeks, where an animal would take months or even years. The results aren't pretty - humans have hyperactive scare tissue, among our other survival oriented skills - but they are highly functional. Speaking of scarring, look at our medical science. We developed surgery before rudimentary anaesthetics or life-support. In extremes, humans have been known to perform surgery on themselves and survive. We regard routine medical surgeries procedures what other species would consider murder. We even perform radical surgeries for purely cosmetic reasons.

When our jaws have too many teeth in them, we have been accustomed to welding metal to our teeth and force the bones in our jaw to reconstruct over the course of years, and then continue to weld metal into our mouth to keep them there.

And by god, we will eat anything.

We will season our foods with borderline toxic peppers. We expose ourselves to potentially deadly solar radiation in pursuit of darker skin. We risk hearing loss to listen to loud noise in rhythms we enjoy. We have games where we watch two people in an arena and hit one another until one of them passes out/time runs out. We willingly jump from high altitudes and place our trust in cloth to float down to the ground. Our response to natural disasters is to rebuild what we had there in the same place. We climb to extreme heights, risking freezing to death, for mere bragging rights. We invented Dogs to help us hunt for animals. We took our one-time predators and domesticated them. Our planet is filled with deadly predators, both in the sky, in the sea, under and on ground. Yet we managed to advance further than all of them, and we want to advance further all the time.

Humans are just plain scary.

Can I be your slave?

[Vorkova]

snip

And now we have the perfect manifest destiny to conquer the stars with.

[Jullin]

If you think about it, Humans are pretty scary.

We can keep fighting for hours after any injury, removing limbs won't fatally injure us if we can quickly patch it up and put pressure on it, we reproduce once a year, we have over 30 bones in our mouth and powerful jaw muscles, our bites are hard and in some cases, can cause infections, we project bioweapons from our bodies. We use improvised weapons from nearly anything we can get our hands on, and get extensive training to improve our motions to inflict major harm. Our endurance, shock resistance, ability to recover from injury are absurd compared to other animals even on Earth. There is evidence that our ancestors would out-walk our prey without sleep or rest, until the animal died of exhaustion. There is only one animal capable of keeping up with us: Dogs. Which we have domesticated and are known as best friends. Think about it! We don't even have to use weapons in some cases. We just have to merely show up and follow our prey. We are intelligent enough to follow you just by faded prints, feces, fur and feathers.

Now to compare ourselves to a species that didn't have to work against a larger predator:

Our speed and strength alone aren't anything to write home about, but we don't need that. We just need to outlast whatever we are fighting. And by any other species (on earth) standards, we don't get tired. Where a simple broken leg will cause any species on earth to go into shock and die, we can recover from virtually any non-immediate fatal injury. Even traumatic dismemberment isn't a career ending injury for a human. We heal from injuries rapidly, recovering in days or weeks, where an animal would take months or even years. The results aren't pretty - humans have hyperactive scare tissue, among our other survival oriented skills - but they are highly functional. Speaking of scarring, look at our medical science. We developed surgery before rudimentary anaesthetics or life-support. In extremes, humans have been known to perform surgery on themselves and survive. We regard routine medical surgeries procedures what other species would consider murder. We even perform radical surgeries for purely cosmetic reasons.

When our jaws have too many teeth in them, we have been accustomed to welding metal to our teeth and force the bones in our jaw to reconstruct over the course of years, and then continue to weld metal into our mouth to keep them there.

And by god, we will eat anything.

We will season our foods with borderline toxic peppers. We expose ourselves to potentially deadly solar radiation in pursuit of darker skin. We risk hearing loss to listen to loud noise in rhythms we enjoy. We have games where we watch two people in an arena and hit one another until one of them passes out/time runs out. We willingly jump from high altitudes and place our trust in cloth to float down to the ground. Our response to natural disasters is to rebuild what we had there in the same place. We climb to extreme heights, risking freezing to death, for mere bragging rights. We invented Dogs to help us hunt for animals. We took our one-time predators and domesticated them. Our planet is filled with deadly predators, both in the sky, in the sea, under and on ground. Yet we managed to advance further than all of them, and we want to advance further all the time.

Humans are just plain scary.

You just made me proud to be human. That doesn't happen very often, so thanks!

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

As a reference for future stuff, what sorta of gravity level would be required or whatever to allow sky whale like creatures? And how would colonizing said planet be like?

[Feazanthia]

Doesn't have to have a much lighter gravity. You could have a very deep, dense atmosphere (and bladders of helium or hydrogen, assuming they can absorb such elements from their environment) and do it that way.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Doesn't have to have a much lighter gravity. You could have a very deep, dense atmosphere (and bladders of helium or hydrogen, assuming they can absorb such elements from their environment) and do it that way.

How would the atmosphere part affect colonizing?

[Rethan]

Doesn't have to have a much lighter gravity. You could have a very deep, dense atmosphere (and bladders of helium or hydrogen, assuming they can absorb such elements from their environment) and do it that way.

How would the atmosphere part affect colonizing?

If you have the technology to get to a new planet, it shouldn't effect it much at all. Might make it slightly more difficult, since you'd need to build domes. A very dense atmosphere would make open air breathing difficult depending on the elements in it, so you'd need to insulate your colonies and couldn't have them open air.