>>Preliminary Report - response for the SMAC design team

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Old Test Forums
  >>Preliminary Report - response for the SMAC design team

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   >>Preliminary Report - response for the SMAC design team

Synthetic posted 11-17-98 05:27 PM ET
This report on the SMAC web page is great, but has a fundamental flaw which should be corrected. Alterations to the hour and minute in order to keep some similarity in time scales is commendable, but altering the value of the second is simply reprehensible.
You see, the hour and minute are not terribly important values, since they are merely larger groupings of seconds. But if you alter the value of the second, you are invalidating every scientific constant developed or discovered that quantifies time.
What is the speed of light now that the second is 2.68% shorter? How can we compare gravitic acceleration of 9.81m/s^2 on earth to Chiron's 12.85m/s^2 when the value of the second is not constant for both systems?
What is the benefit of scaling the second when we have to discard (or recalculate) all of our formulas and tables to fit the new system? This imposes far more work than is plausable.
And just imagine the amount of sheer reworking this 2.86% change makes in computers! All technology brought from earth would immediately be pretty worthless if it incorporated an earth-manufactured timer in it. What about redesigning circuitry inside of computer chips to compensate for a 2.86% increase in crystal vibration in order for it to keep time correctly... does this mean that all of SMAC's technology uses overclocked processors?
Finally... getting back the speed of light, this value is supposed to be defined as constant relative to a time scale. Screwing with the time scale just to make counting minutes more easy is a really silly idea if you have to re-calibrate every time-related device and formula that humans own.
I know many of you out there are science fiction fans... so remember what Manny said in "The moon is a harsh mistress" (robert heinlein) about the moon council wanting to change the calendar to it fit the moon rather than the earth. Just because you CAN change something doesn't mean that it's going to actually do anything worthwhile.
Let's use some of that burgeoning intelligence.
-synthetic
DHE_X2 posted 11-17-98 05:31 PM ET
Wow, a newbie whose first post is actually, well, quite good. I must admit, I looked over the report and missed the significance of the altered value of the second. Quite good work.
CClark posted 11-17-98 05:50 PM ET
Although it is an interesting topic, I feel that I have to point out that as far as gameplay goes, it will make no difference at all. The turns are going to be measured in years (most likely, at the very smallest it would be decurns) so this little "oops" will not actually have any real bearing on the gameplay.
Still, it'll be interesting to see what humanswind up doing if/when we establish bases on the Moon or on Mars. Hmmm...
Also, regardless of the time scale used, how will humans adjust to the different day/night cycles or will habitations be enclosed in windowless dones with artifical day/night cycles?
Synthetic posted 11-17-98 06:00 PM ET
All the measurements given in the technical brief for data on the world(s) indicate earth as being 9.81m/s^2, which means that all that data is in "earth normal" representation. Why? Aren't we now supposed to be SMACers living in this new alien world?
I just think the design (or story) team stumbled slightly. If you examine all their other techno-speak, it's quite fun... but when they trip on something so obvious... well... it destroys the atmosphere.
Sure, it doesn't affect gameplay... but we're talking about a mode of thinking here, not just a simple game of statistical analysis and simulation in a computational environment. If they are going to put this much effort into making the whole story and scenario plausible and enthralling, let's get the details correct.
-synthetic
BKK the Mentat posted 11-17-98 06:52 PM ET
Here are all the flaws I can identify:
Alpha Centuari is not usauly refered to as "Alpha Prime", but as Alpha Centuari, Rigel Kentuarus, or Tholiman.
Nitrogen Narcosis cannot ocur in humans until pressure is at >3.5 earth atmosheres, the air on Planet is technicly breathable, but would make the storyline too much like Star Treck.
Alpha Centuarui B is not refered to as Hercules, and is not a K5V, it is a K1V(which still does't say much about it's brightness).
The Alpha Centuari system is not a little bit older than Sol, it is nearly a billion years older.(Sol-4.5Gyr RK A/B-5-5.5Gyr Proxima-~1Gyr)
Spoe posted 11-17-98 07:14 PM ET
I've seen the brightness of AC B listed from 0.37 - 0.44 S.
If is still debatable if Proxima if bound to the AC system. Calculations based on the most recent(1967) radial velocity measurements suggest that it is not and just happens to be passing by.
Spoe posted 11-17-98 07:16 PM ET
Bah, typo city.
"It is still debatable if Proxima is..."
Synthetic posted 11-17-98 08:00 PM ET
And, as is always the case with interstellar travel... don't forget to take your towel.
Makes me wonder a bit. Here are some rhetorical questions, but which you may answer at your leisure:
- why are large bodies of water blue on earth?
- isn't it collodial refraction that makes the sky blue on earth?
- would the oceans of Planet be blue?
- would the skies of Planet be blue?
- do denser atmospheres have a predisposition towards haze, fog, and particulate suspension... and as such, how would that affect line of sight?
- has anyone else (besides me) seen that horrid grade-D black-n-white serial titled "Zombies of the Stratosphere" in which Leonard Nimoy (about age 20 or so) played a bit part as a Martian?
- does anyone else plan to use a horrid fake slavic accent when playing as Doctor Zhakarov?
Just wondering...
-synthetic
Lee Johnson posted 11-18-98 11:08 AM ET
- isn't it collodial refraction that makes the sky blue on earth?
I thought it was Rayleigh scattering. Hmmm... just checking some sources on the 'net... Yeah, that's it. Go here:
http://www.last-word.com/lastword/answers/lwa065.html
And this page discusses your ocean colour question:
http://www.last-word.com/lastword/answers/lwa497.html
Man, you can find anything on the 'net. :-)
MikeH II posted 11-18-98 11:15 AM ET
I think that means (without reading Lee's sources) that the colour of the sky and sea depend on the composition of the atmosphere. Therefore Chiron wouldn't have blue sky or sea.
BoomBoom posted 11-18-98 11:31 AM ET
The colour of the water also depends on the microorganisms that live there. That's why some is green,brown,reddish or blue. Water is seen as blue because the sky is reflected in it; on a cloudy day, normally blue water isnot as blue.
Synthetic posted 11-20-98 12:49 PM ET
So I guess the question is why every game has blue water? Rare is the time that we have seen anything different.
My biggest beef is still messing with the basic unit of time. That still makes absolutely no sense.
-synthetic
Old_Guy posted 11-20-98 01:35 PM ET
I don't know if it's any comfort to you, but if Firaxis was willing to change Saratov's name because of input from Russian fans, then maybe they'll correct the report...
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: >>Preliminary Report - response for the SMAC design team
Synthetic	posted 11-17-98 05:27 PM ET This report on the SMAC web page is great, but has a fundamental flaw which should be corrected. Alterations to the hour and minute in order to keep some similarity in time scales is commendable, but altering the value of the second is simply reprehensible. You see, the hour and minute are not terribly important values, since they are merely larger groupings of seconds. But if you alter the value of the second, you are invalidating every scientific constant developed or discovered that quantifies time. What is the speed of light now that the second is 2.68% shorter? How can we compare gravitic acceleration of 9.81m/s^2 on earth to Chiron's 12.85m/s^2 when the value of the second is not constant for both systems? What is the benefit of scaling the second when we have to discard (or recalculate) all of our formulas and tables to fit the new system? This imposes far more work than is plausable. And just imagine the amount of sheer reworking this 2.86% change makes in computers! All technology brought from earth would immediately be pretty worthless if it incorporated an earth-manufactured timer in it. What about redesigning circuitry inside of computer chips to compensate for a 2.86% increase in crystal vibration in order for it to keep time correctly... does this mean that all of SMAC's technology uses overclocked processors? Finally... getting back the speed of light, this value is supposed to be defined as constant relative to a time scale. Screwing with the time scale just to make counting minutes more easy is a really silly idea if you have to re-calibrate every time-related device and formula that humans own. I know many of you out there are science fiction fans... so remember what Manny said in "The moon is a harsh mistress" (robert heinlein) about the moon council wanting to change the calendar to it fit the moon rather than the earth. Just because you CAN change something doesn't mean that it's going to actually do anything worthwhile. Let's use some of that burgeoning intelligence. -synthetic
DHE_X2	posted 11-17-98 05:31 PM ET Wow, a newbie whose first post is actually, well, quite good. I must admit, I looked over the report and missed the significance of the altered value of the second. Quite good work.
CClark	posted 11-17-98 05:50 PM ET Although it is an interesting topic, I feel that I have to point out that as far as gameplay goes, it will make no difference at all. The turns are going to be measured in years (most likely, at the very smallest it would be decurns) so this little "oops" will not actually have any real bearing on the gameplay. Still, it'll be interesting to see what humanswind up doing if/when we establish bases on the Moon or on Mars. Hmmm... Also, regardless of the time scale used, how will humans adjust to the different day/night cycles or will habitations be enclosed in windowless dones with artifical day/night cycles?
Synthetic	posted 11-17-98 06:00 PM ET All the measurements given in the technical brief for data on the world(s) indicate earth as being 9.81m/s^2, which means that all that data is in "earth normal" representation. Why? Aren't we now supposed to be SMACers living in this new alien world? I just think the design (or story) team stumbled slightly. If you examine all their other techno-speak, it's quite fun... but when they trip on something so obvious... well... it destroys the atmosphere. Sure, it doesn't affect gameplay... but we're talking about a mode of thinking here, not just a simple game of statistical analysis and simulation in a computational environment. If they are going to put this much effort into making the whole story and scenario plausible and enthralling, let's get the details correct. -synthetic
BKK the Mentat	posted 11-17-98 06:52 PM ET Here are all the flaws I can identify: Alpha Centuari is not usauly refered to as "Alpha Prime", but as Alpha Centuari, Rigel Kentuarus, or Tholiman. Nitrogen Narcosis cannot ocur in humans until pressure is at >3.5 earth atmosheres, the air on Planet is technicly breathable, but would make the storyline too much like Star Treck. Alpha Centuarui B is not refered to as Hercules, and is not a K5V, it is a K1V(which still does't say much about it's brightness). The Alpha Centuari system is not a little bit older than Sol, it is nearly a billion years older.(Sol-4.5Gyr RK A/B-5-5.5Gyr Proxima-~1Gyr)
Spoe	posted 11-17-98 07:14 PM ET I've seen the brightness of AC B listed from 0.37 - 0.44 S. If is still debatable if Proxima if bound to the AC system. Calculations based on the most recent(1967) radial velocity measurements suggest that it is not and just happens to be passing by.
Spoe	posted 11-17-98 07:16 PM ET Bah, typo city. "It is still debatable if Proxima is..."
Synthetic	posted 11-17-98 08:00 PM ET And, as is always the case with interstellar travel... don't forget to take your towel. Makes me wonder a bit. Here are some rhetorical questions, but which you may answer at your leisure: - why are large bodies of water blue on earth? - isn't it collodial refraction that makes the sky blue on earth? - would the oceans of Planet be blue? - would the skies of Planet be blue? - do denser atmospheres have a predisposition towards haze, fog, and particulate suspension... and as such, how would that affect line of sight? - has anyone else (besides me) seen that horrid grade-D black-n-white serial titled "Zombies of the Stratosphere" in which Leonard Nimoy (about age 20 or so) played a bit part as a Martian? - does anyone else plan to use a horrid fake slavic accent when playing as Doctor Zhakarov? Just wondering... -synthetic
Lee Johnson	posted 11-18-98 11:08 AM ET - isn't it collodial refraction that makes the sky blue on earth? I thought it was Rayleigh scattering. Hmmm... just checking some sources on the 'net... Yeah, that's it. Go here: http://www.last-word.com/lastword/answers/lwa065.html And this page discusses your ocean colour question: http://www.last-word.com/lastword/answers/lwa497.html Man, you can find anything on the 'net. :-)
MikeH II	posted 11-18-98 11:15 AM ET I think that means (without reading Lee's sources) that the colour of the sky and sea depend on the composition of the atmosphere. Therefore Chiron wouldn't have blue sky or sea.
BoomBoom	posted 11-18-98 11:31 AM ET The colour of the water also depends on the microorganisms that live there. That's why some is green,brown,reddish or blue. Water is seen as blue because the sky is reflected in it; on a cloudy day, normally blue water isnot as blue.
Synthetic	posted 11-20-98 12:49 PM ET So I guess the question is why every game has blue water? Rare is the time that we have seen anything different. My biggest beef is still messing with the basic unit of time. That still makes absolutely no sense. -synthetic
Old_Guy	posted 11-20-98 01:35 PM ET I don't know if it's any comfort to you, but if Firaxis was willing to change Saratov's name because of input from Russian fans, then maybe they'll correct the report...