Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
BamBam Buddha
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 08:59:00 -
[1]
Here is one possible explanation i have come up with that i was told to post.
also i posted cause i got tired of WHY DO WE WARP THROUGH PLANETS ARE THE DEVS THAT LAZY?????? >:( no....they arent ,they are swamped actually , if you can do better the go write you own warp script and send it to them.
anywho let me know what you think
[08:47:05] BamBam Buddha > warp drive possibility: eve warp drives work on the molecular level, when an eve ship enters warp the ship actually splits into its base components down to the quark level, before warp the drive is pre charged with a power burst allowing it to not only
[08:47:15] BamBam Buddha > split the ship but accelerate the individual particles by create a magnetic "bubble" (this is actually a magnetic tube that accelerates and decelerates the particles) in which to contain the particles for later reassembly via a mass of nanobots,
[08:47:23] BamBam Buddha > the particles remain so close together that reassembly can happen almost instantaneously this also makes the ship appear to still be whole scaring the **** outta people planetside. the benefit of spliting the ship like this is that it greatly reduces
[08:47:32] BamBam Buddha > navigation time as the particles can pass through any planet or object unaffected. it also reduces the power need of accelerating the ship to near light speeds, as the magnetic field is accelerating individual particles, requiring far less power than
[08:47:41] BamBam Buddha > accelerating an entire ship at once (per einsteins theory)
[08:47:50] BamBam Buddha > there, i think that about does it
[08:49:22] BamBam Buddha > i think that would also explain not beign able to target too soon after warp in
[08:49:49] BamBam Buddha > because while we would see a ship the ships sensors would just see a cloud of dust
|
Br41n
Amarr Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:01:00 -
[2]
0/10 go read the damn backstory on eve there's a button on the left. it's all explained ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pinky: Gee, Brain. What are we going to do tonight?
Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
BamBam Buddha
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:18:00 -
[3]
Well I'm sorry the baby isn't impressed, but this is much closer to a real explanation than a frictionless vacuum, because as we know a vacuum or object doesn't affect the speed that light travels, also your precious back-story still doesn't compensate for warping through planets, this does.
|
Shoopa Whoopa
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:43:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Shoopa Whoopa on 27/02/2011 09:44:28 Pseudoscience.
Not even high powered gamma rays penetrate a planet. And splitting it into quarks.. but still have nanobots around (which are larger than atoms)?
Just a few problems with this from the top of my head.
|
Jane Griffin
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:44:00 -
[5]
Actually, relative to us, the medium that light travels through does indeed effect its speed. Only in a 100% vacuum does light reach its theoretical max, and there are no 100% vacuums so...
Other than that, please just dont have us warping though planets plz.
|
Shoopa Whoopa
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:51:00 -
[6]
Also: Speed of light = 299,792,458 m/s Warping at 6AU/s = 879.587.224.200 m/s
That's 2.934 (twothousandninehundredthirtyfour) times the speed of light.
Damn, that's extreme, maybe my math is off?!
|
Fyrgen Hith
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 10:22:00 -
[7]
Actually if I remember correctly inside of a warp bubble your not in the same space as the planet per say, sort of like your being moved partly out of 'our' universe and into another. If I remember correctly.
|
Slapsy
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 10:26:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Shoopa Whoopa Also: Speed of light = 299,792,458 m/s Warping at 6AU/s = 879.587.224.200 m/s
That's 2.934 (twothousandninehundredthirtyfour) times the speed of light.
Damn, that's extreme, maybe my math is off?!
Seems about right. Remember, 1AU is the mean distance between the Earth and the sun, and light takes about 8 minutes to travel that distance.
|
Amanda Mor
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 10:28:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Amanda Mor on 27/02/2011 10:30:24 Edited by: Amanda Mor on 27/02/2011 10:29:19
Originally by: Shoopa Woopa
Speed of light = 299,792,458 m/s Warping at 6AU/s = 879.587.224.200 m/s
That's 2.934 (twothousandninehundredthirtyfour) times the speed of light.
Damn, that's extreme, maybe my math is off?!
It isn't off - that's about right.
One AU is the distance from Earth to the Sun, approx. 93 million miles. It takes the Suns rays 8 minutes to reach the Earth. Eve ships do 1 AU jumps in practically no time at all, thus our typical warp speeds (3-6 AU/sec, sometimes higher), are much, much faster than the speed of light.
How about we explain that before worrying about warping thru planets. Or we can just ignore it all, realizing that compromises have to be made to minimize the absolute boredom that would come from actual interstellar travel.
Edit: Damn you Slapsy. ---------------------------------------------- I don't have an alt, but there's a main that would be upset if he heard me say that... |
Neutrino Sunset
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 11:15:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Fyrgen Hith Actually if I remember correctly inside of a warp bubble your not in the same space as the planet per say, sort of like your being moved partly out of 'our' universe and into another. If I remember correctly.
Hyperspace and warp are two different things.
|
|
Evai Tsuki
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 11:17:00 -
[11]
It's a warp bubble. Essentially from my understanding the warp bubble basically removes the ship from our definition of reality. Hence why our ships don't get torn to shreds by space junk every time we warp. And if we can travel through space junk, why not a planet?
|
Shoopa Whoopa
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 11:28:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Shoopa Whoopa on 27/02/2011 11:28:30
Originally by: Evai Tsuki Essentially from my understanding the warp bubble basically removes the ship from our definition of reality. Hence why our ships don't get torn to shreds by space junk every time we warp. And if we can travel through space junk, why not a planet?
Technically, that would be hyperspace. And not exactly remove it from our definition of reality; rather remove it from our definition of space. Warp doesn't really allow for FTL travel, but I suppose it can be combined with hyperspace, which is a good explanation for what we see in Eve.
|
Auvergne Emir
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 11:35:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Amanda Mor Or we can just ignore it all, realizing that compromises have to be made to minimize the absolute boredom that would come from actual interstellar travel.
|
Aidin Amado
Department of Defence
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 12:41:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Aidin Amado on 27/02/2011 12:41:34 There is a mathematical model for a warp drive that doesn't break the theory of relativity, and which still allow for superluminal travel. The Alcubierre drive.
In this model you're in your own "reality" where the laws of relativity still apply. It's only the bubble that "bends" the space-time, and it can move faster than light. And in that model, planets and things outside the bubble would be bent away. As far as I understand it.
|
ClimberDave
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:06:00 -
[15]
I subscribe the Jet-Black theory. Matter which is enclosed hyperspace can be viewed normally with the naked eye but cannot interact with matter on this plane of reality.
|
Ben Alman
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:06:00 -
[16]
Well the "official" Star Trek Explanation is that warp generates a separate space around your ship and is then moving this space through the normal space. As space itself has no mass faster then light speeds are possible as your ship remains stationary in your own space. Therefore collision can't occur since the universe is getting bent around your ship.
Afaik this concept isn't even disproved by science yet^^
|
Selinate
Amarr Red Water Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:09:00 -
[17]
|
Polemarchus
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:21:00 -
[18]
"Imagine that! It never occurred to me to think of SPACE as the thing that was moving!"
- Montgomery Scott, after seeing his (yet to be invented) theory of transwarp beaming
|
Halcyon Ingenium
Caldari Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:33:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Aidin Amado Edited by: Aidin Amado on 27/02/2011 12:41:34 There is a mathematical model for a warp drive that doesn't break the theory of relativity, and which still allow for superluminal travel. The Alcubierre drive.
In this model you're in your own "reality" where the laws of relativity still apply. It's only the bubble that "bends" the space-time, and it can move faster than light. And in that model, planets and things outside the bubble would be bent away. As far as I understand it.
No, they wouldn't be bent away, your warping spacetime, you certainly are not in a separate reality. If anything ramming a region of space undergoing such a Lorentz transformation into a large body like a planet would be extremely destructive; the equivalent of ramming a black hole into a planet. By the way, real men biomass when they emoragequit.
|
AlleyKat
Gallente The Unwanted.
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:40:00 -
[20]
I love these discussions when two people argue one form of fiction with another form of fiction.
It will go on forever, because they are both pieces of fiction and therefore neither of them are valid arguments.
For the official fiction-based answer, as others have said, you need to look at the evelopedia.
Long live suspension of disbelief.
AK EVE-ONLINE Video-Making Tutorials Vid - New Tricks |
|
Selinate
Amarr Red Water Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 13:48:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Selinate on 27/02/2011 13:50:16
Originally by: AlleyKat I love these discussions when two people argue one form of fiction with another form of fiction.
It will go on forever, because they are both pieces of fiction and therefore neither of them are valid arguments.
For the official fiction-based answer, as others have said, you need to look at the evelopedia.
Long live suspension of disbelief.
AK
this x 1 ****ing thousand.
|
Rima Tann
Tann Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 14:05:00 -
[22]
Some science then. A single quark passing through our planet can be detected by measuring tiny Seismic events around the planet, and it's trajectory can be determined by drawing a straight line between two related events.
To be honest I dont know how often we get hit by quarks but if they do cause minor seismic events how much would we notice all the quarks in a Battleship passing through our planet at the same time.
I'm no scientist or expert, just know what I read, so if I'm wrong please resist the urge to nerdgasm all over me.
|
Drenvar
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 15:28:00 -
[23]
Its kinda funny seeing this topic this today! Just last night I was showing EVE to a friend, trying to talk them into playing and of corse the same thing happen that always happens when I show someone EVE. My ship warps through a planet or station. "Dude! you just flew through a planet! WTF!" I dont even try to explain it anymore. I just say its a bug.
|
fire elf
Solar Storm Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 15:33:00 -
[24]
^^ Nicely Written !
|
Jovan Geldon
Gallente Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:04:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Rima Tann Some science then. A single quark passing through our planet can be detected by measuring tiny Seismic events around the planet, and it's trajectory can be determined by drawing a straight line between two related events.
To be honest I dont know how often we get hit by quarks but if they do cause minor seismic events how much would we notice all the quarks in a Battleship passing through our planet at the same time.
I'm no scientist or expert, just know what I read, so if I'm wrong please resist the urge to nerdgasm all over me.
Failed resist check. Commencing nerdgasm.
Quarks are not what you think they are (judging by your reference to seismic events I think you might be referring to Neutrinos).
Quarks are, in fact, the smallest fundamental particle yet discovered. They are the constituent particles of hadrons (protons and neutrons, amongst other things) and only ever exist in pairs or triplets. There are 6 types (or flavours) of quark; up, down, top, bottom, strange, and charm. Each particular combination of quarks constitutes a particular hadron, for example a proton is made up of 2 up and 1 down quark, and a neutron is made up of 2 down and 1 up quark.
So, imagine how many things hit the Earth every day (interstellar dust, space debris, solar mass ejections, etc. etc.). Then imagine how many atoms are in all of those things. Then imagine the number of protons and neutrons in those atoms. Then multiply by three. And that's how many quarks hit the Earth every day . Suffice to say, they don't cause "minor seismic events" of any magnitude sufficient to even notice their passing.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:10:00 -
[26]
Buckaroo Banzai explained all this 25 years ago noob.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Rima Tann
Tann Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:25:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Jovan Geldon
Originally by: Rima Tann ...nonsense...
...nerdgasm...
I stand corrected, I'm clearly thinking of something else. Well he was my fav DS9 char
|
Aeronwen Carys
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:26:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Aeronwen Carys on 27/02/2011 16:29:36
Another slightly more plausible, though no less easier to prove, theory says that a functional "warp" or "hyperspace" drive would create a starship sized passageway into one of the adjoining dimensions that co-exist alongside our own. This adjoining dimension is close enough to our own that objects in the dimension we live in are visible to a degree from the otherside as photons can pass between the two. It would however, not allow interaction between mass existing in the primary dimension and mass in the secondary dimension, allowing a ship to seemingly pass through a solid object such as a planet.
Now to the actual travelling part. Theory says that the "space" inside this second dimension would be more tightly compressed than in our own, meaning that the distance between point A and point B inside the second dimension would be much closer together. What this means is that while point A and B inside the second dimension have corresponding locations in the primary dimension, the distance between them in a physical sense is much smaller. Therefore a journey which in normal space might take 4 weeks, could be completed in four hours by travelling in the "smaller" second dimension.
If im right, one name for this theoretical technology would be a "Continuous Wormhole Drive" and it appears not only in some popular science fiction stories, but has also been discussed at length by some of the greatest scientific minds of our time. The important thing to note here is that a continuous wormhole drive does not break the laws of relativity, allows for the negation of time dilation for the traveller and is somewhat less "out there" than other ideas.
|
Kogh Ayon
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:28:00 -
[29]
Keep in mind that we have a rig can boost your warp speed :D
They need a fast way to do interstellar movements to saves the traveling time.
But jump drives should be limited in case people lose the fun of fight.
|
Mister Rocknrolla
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:58:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Mister Rocknrolla on 27/02/2011 16:58:55 This doesn't explain how/why I can fly my ship through planets at sub-warp speeds.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |