Purr-tificial Gravity
Jul. 30th, 2015 12:35 pmOriginally posted by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
dieselsweet at Purr-tificial Gravity
dieselsweet at Purr-tificial Gravity
Let’s mix it up with some of my theoretical physics research tonight.
Fantasy Flight
Aug. 14th, 2014 08:29 pmSuperman 2 was on one of the TV networks we get this afternoon, and I have to say it hasn't aged as well as I expected. It got me thinking about things like speed and how we perceive motion.
I'm about average size for a human being. If I went like the Man of Steel and flew at a rate of my own body's "flight length" per second, that's only about 5 mph--or jogging speed. Just to put this in perspective:
* A WW1 biplane fighter at combat speed travels at five times its length per second.
* A WW2 heavy bomber or transport plane at cruise speed will also be moving at about five times its length per second. (Because of the difference in size compared to the smaller planes of WW1, this would mean double the actual speed!)
* A WW2 fighter at its combat speed would go 15 times its length per second.
* A modern fighter jet at Mach 1 would be moving 25 times its length per second.
* A NASCAR or LeMans race car at 200 miles per hour goes nearly 20 times its length per second.
We don't think of these things when we watch fantasy movies (or sci-fi space opera) because we don't want to suspend our disbelief. When Harry Potter is on his broomstick we don't clock his progress because he's moving at the speed of plot, not 45 miles per hour.
FP
Tags:
- airplanes,
- comic books,
- dc comics,
- fandom,
- fantasy,
- film,
- flight,
- harry potter,
- ideas,
- magic,
- mathematics,
- movies,
- nascar,
- physics,
- speed,
- superheroes,
- superman,
- tv
Useless Gamer Facts
Apr. 4th, 2013 05:40 pmThe current terrain scale for Battletech is 1/600. It used to be 1/400 but it changed in later editions.
The game Dropzone Commander has downloadable modern city building paper models in their scale of 1/150. So if I want a batch of buildings in Battletech scale I could print them out one-fourth their intended size...and pack SIXTEEN of them onto one sheet!
The game Dropzone Commander has downloadable modern city building paper models in their scale of 1/150. So if I want a batch of buildings in Battletech scale I could print them out one-fourth their intended size...and pack SIXTEEN of them onto one sheet!
Better Or Worse Than Average?
Dec. 31st, 2012 01:47 pmA sidebar advert on Facebook today claimed that the average person has been to 17 cities. So I took that as a challenge, got a very small scale map of the U.S. out of a date book, and will check off from my travel experiences.
I was born in Erie, but according to the map it's too small to count. From there:
Cleveland - Columbus - Cincinatti - Charleston, WV - Niagara Falls - Pittsburgh - Baltimore - Washington, DC - Richmond - Charleston, SC - Savannah - Jacksonville - Tampa - St. Petersburg - Orlando - Gainesville - Macon - Atlanta - Chattanooga - Knoxville - Asheville - Columbia - Lexington - Louisville - Indianapolis - Chicago - Madison - Minneapolis/St. Paul
That's 28. Which I suppose is fairly impressive for somebody who didn't get into sports and who never had a job that involved travel. But as far as I'm concerned, it's nowhere near enough.
FP
I was born in Erie, but according to the map it's too small to count. From there:
Cleveland - Columbus - Cincinatti - Charleston, WV - Niagara Falls - Pittsburgh - Baltimore - Washington, DC - Richmond - Charleston, SC - Savannah - Jacksonville - Tampa - St. Petersburg - Orlando - Gainesville - Macon - Atlanta - Chattanooga - Knoxville - Asheville - Columbia - Lexington - Louisville - Indianapolis - Chicago - Madison - Minneapolis/St. Paul
That's 28. Which I suppose is fairly impressive for somebody who didn't get into sports and who never had a job that involved travel. But as far as I'm concerned, it's nowhere near enough.
FP
Smart Shopping And End Games
Jun. 23rd, 2012 08:18 pmI bought more Race Day packs today and it closed up much of my collection's gaps. At least the ones in the "old" set, anyway. The "new" set packs are cheaper and two of the drivers I still want are commons so I'm pretty much assured that I'll get them eventually if I keep buying packs. I'm already hitting the Law of Diminishing Returns, tho'; three of the eight cards I got today were duplicates, so if the averages keep going as seen, I'll have a load of them if I buy too many packs.
I don't so much want to complete the set as to have the overwhelming majority of the available drivers, but with a minimum of duplicates.
Meanwhile, I have to buy new ink for my printer as we need to have a lot of documents copied and run off in the near future. My unit takes two different sizes of ink cartridges (black and tri-color each), and while our favorite office supply store markets their own cartridges that are cheaper than the original manufacturers', they don't have the larger black one in their stocks. But they might have two-for-one packs of the smaller black ones.
The art of this bargain is to decide which combination of cartridges is more economic for our uses. Which means I won't just have to bring product numbers and a coupon...I'll need my calculator.
I don't so much want to complete the set as to have the overwhelming majority of the available drivers, but with a minimum of duplicates.
Meanwhile, I have to buy new ink for my printer as we need to have a lot of documents copied and run off in the near future. My unit takes two different sizes of ink cartridges (black and tri-color each), and while our favorite office supply store markets their own cartridges that are cheaper than the original manufacturers', they don't have the larger black one in their stocks. But they might have two-for-one packs of the smaller black ones.
The art of this bargain is to decide which combination of cartridges is more economic for our uses. Which means I won't just have to bring product numbers and a coupon...I'll need my calculator.
Update To The Random Topic
Jun. 16th, 2012 12:00 amWell, in addition to the one source for Race Day packs I'd found, I noticed that another source had packs of the other edition--cheaper than original price, but not as great a bargain as the earlier place. Still, it was worth it for me to get another couple packs of the "alternative" set.
There are sixty total Race Day cars, but only twenty-five specific drivers, because a number of drivers have duplicates in set. One (Dale Earnhardt Senior) is only available in an expensive promo pack, so I won't bother trying to find him. So far, I've gotten seven packs and acquired eleven drivers, with thirteen still to go. Two of the drivers I don't have are Commons in a set, so if I get three or more packs of that set it's nigh certain that I'll get them. Most of the rest are Uncommons, with only one driver who is a Rare-only.
Of course, I have no illusions that if I bought a lot more packs I wouldn't wind up with a bunch of duplicates. That's a given, seeing that at least half the packs will have Commons, and I've already got half of the existing Commons.
I don't know where I'm going with this. Maybe that's the point. I'm just playing to play.
There are sixty total Race Day cars, but only twenty-five specific drivers, because a number of drivers have duplicates in set. One (Dale Earnhardt Senior) is only available in an expensive promo pack, so I won't bother trying to find him. So far, I've gotten seven packs and acquired eleven drivers, with thirteen still to go. Two of the drivers I don't have are Commons in a set, so if I get three or more packs of that set it's nigh certain that I'll get them. Most of the rest are Uncommons, with only one driver who is a Rare-only.
Of course, I have no illusions that if I bought a lot more packs I wouldn't wind up with a bunch of duplicates. That's a given, seeing that at least half the packs will have Commons, and I've already got half of the existing Commons.
I don't know where I'm going with this. Maybe that's the point. I'm just playing to play.
Random Musings On Randomness
Jun. 14th, 2012 06:56 pm--And possibly random shopping.
I found a tourist trap shop that has an abundant supply of now-passe NASCAR Race Day packs. Race Day is a game that Wizkids put out in 2005~'06 with stock car models printed onto plastic card pieces that the user assembles. The track is a poster-sized sheet of paper that is also included in the game pack. (Suddenly I want to call it "NASCARcheezi".) I got five packs, opened them, and got a little educated on the game itself and the topic of "rarity" as it applies to such things.
There are three levels of rarity at play here: COMMON, UNCOMMON and RARE. Every pack in my sample had an Uncommon, and since there are twelve Uncommons in the set if the selection premise holds, then there is a 1 in 12 chance of getting any specific Uncommon in any pack. The remaining pieces in my sample were split between Commons and Rares 3 to 2, so if that held, then logically the likelihood of getting a specific Rare is 40% less than that of getting a specific Uncommon, since there are an equal number of Uncommons and Rares in the total series set.
Again presuming my selection premise is true, there is a 60% chance of getting a Common in any pack, and so because there are only 4 Commons in the set, a 15% chance of getting a specific Common. And a mathematic certainty of getting a specific Common from buying only seven packs at a random.
I'm glad that I didn't have a fandom reason to get into this earlier, but at the same time, I wish I could have done a better job learning probability math in college.
I found a tourist trap shop that has an abundant supply of now-passe NASCAR Race Day packs. Race Day is a game that Wizkids put out in 2005~'06 with stock car models printed onto plastic card pieces that the user assembles. The track is a poster-sized sheet of paper that is also included in the game pack. (Suddenly I want to call it "NASCARcheezi".) I got five packs, opened them, and got a little educated on the game itself and the topic of "rarity" as it applies to such things.
There are three levels of rarity at play here: COMMON, UNCOMMON and RARE. Every pack in my sample had an Uncommon, and since there are twelve Uncommons in the set if the selection premise holds, then there is a 1 in 12 chance of getting any specific Uncommon in any pack. The remaining pieces in my sample were split between Commons and Rares 3 to 2, so if that held, then logically the likelihood of getting a specific Rare is 40% less than that of getting a specific Uncommon, since there are an equal number of Uncommons and Rares in the total series set.
Again presuming my selection premise is true, there is a 60% chance of getting a Common in any pack, and so because there are only 4 Commons in the set, a 15% chance of getting a specific Common. And a mathematic certainty of getting a specific Common from buying only seven packs at a random.
I'm glad that I didn't have a fandom reason to get into this earlier, but at the same time, I wish I could have done a better job learning probability math in college.
Titan At Play
Jan. 26th, 2012 12:30 amYet another chapter in the ongoing saga of taking Polish paper model scans and trying to find some worthwhile activity from them...
The aircraft carrier I acquired the other day is 1/200th scale as-is. To bring it up to 1/72nd (so I can pose my collection of airplane models on her deck) RonyaSoft ProPoster sez that by enlargening each plate to 23" wide (proportional scale) each graphics plate would take up eight legal size sheets.
If I were enlargening a 1/33rd scale plane to 1/6th (so that if somebody gave me a World Peacekeepers action figure pilot I could put him in a Hawker Tempest V fighter, for instance), that would mean a 45" wide plate and each plate would take up 30 sheets of paper.
If I wanted a 1/25th scale tank enlargened to 1/6th (so a WP tanker would be driving a Cromwell I happen to have on file), that's a 35" wide plate for 20 sheets per plate.
Whereas a 1/15th scale Volga car I've got enlargened to 1/6th (I've got my excuse) would mean a 21" wide plate and only eight sheets per plate.
I'm gonna need some ink.
The aircraft carrier I acquired the other day is 1/200th scale as-is. To bring it up to 1/72nd (so I can pose my collection of airplane models on her deck) RonyaSoft ProPoster sez that by enlargening each plate to 23" wide (proportional scale) each graphics plate would take up eight legal size sheets.
If I were enlargening a 1/33rd scale plane to 1/6th (so that if somebody gave me a World Peacekeepers action figure pilot I could put him in a Hawker Tempest V fighter, for instance), that would mean a 45" wide plate and each plate would take up 30 sheets of paper.
If I wanted a 1/25th scale tank enlargened to 1/6th (so a WP tanker would be driving a Cromwell I happen to have on file), that's a 35" wide plate for 20 sheets per plate.
Whereas a 1/15th scale Volga car I've got enlargened to 1/6th (I've got my excuse) would mean a 21" wide plate and only eight sheets per plate.
I'm gonna need some ink.
Writer's Block: Roll the dice
Dec. 28th, 2011 01:47 pm[Error: unknown template qotd]
Revealing it causes it to lose its power.
Revealing it causes it to lose its power.
Intelligence, Of A Sort
Dec. 20th, 2011 12:59 amHey.
Last week, I got a link to Flightglobal's survey of the World's Air Forces for 2012 in .PDF form from being a "subscriber" of their online newsletters. (I'd post that link, but you'd still have to subscribe to Flightglobal anyway for it to work.) Anyway:
* The U.S. has the largest military in the sky, with nearly four times the deployed aircraft of the Number 2 nation (the Russian Federation). The Lion's Share of American airpower is in rotorcraft, though--U.S. Army Aviation is the biggest operator of helicopters in the World. Between the Air Force, the Navy and the Marine Corps, America currently has just over 2800 combat planes--18% of the world total, and double the numbers deployed by Russia and the People's Republic of (Mainland) China. (One of America's problems, tho', is the fact that the force is aging and becoming obsolete. If a large-scale conventional war broke out, could America soak up losses and rebuild quickly enough to stay strong?)
* Of the Top 10 combat aircraft in the world's arsenals, the designs are evenly split between American and Soviet/Russian types with no other nations represented. It's odd that the F-5 Tiger series has had more staying power than the Mirage. And that the F-4 Phantom is still a force to be reckoned with!
* The H-60 Blackhawk is the dominant helicopter type in the world. That makes sense, as it is about the same size in terms of capacity as the old Douglas DC-3, which everybody said was so useful it would never be replaced! The Blackhawk does everything the DC-3 used to do, plus can land on a dime!
MORE TO COME.
Last week, I got a link to Flightglobal's survey of the World's Air Forces for 2012 in .PDF form from being a "subscriber" of their online newsletters. (I'd post that link, but you'd still have to subscribe to Flightglobal anyway for it to work.) Anyway:
* The U.S. has the largest military in the sky, with nearly four times the deployed aircraft of the Number 2 nation (the Russian Federation). The Lion's Share of American airpower is in rotorcraft, though--U.S. Army Aviation is the biggest operator of helicopters in the World. Between the Air Force, the Navy and the Marine Corps, America currently has just over 2800 combat planes--18% of the world total, and double the numbers deployed by Russia and the People's Republic of (Mainland) China. (One of America's problems, tho', is the fact that the force is aging and becoming obsolete. If a large-scale conventional war broke out, could America soak up losses and rebuild quickly enough to stay strong?)
* Of the Top 10 combat aircraft in the world's arsenals, the designs are evenly split between American and Soviet/Russian types with no other nations represented. It's odd that the F-5 Tiger series has had more staying power than the Mirage. And that the F-4 Phantom is still a force to be reckoned with!
* The H-60 Blackhawk is the dominant helicopter type in the world. That makes sense, as it is about the same size in terms of capacity as the old Douglas DC-3, which everybody said was so useful it would never be replaced! The Blackhawk does everything the DC-3 used to do, plus can land on a dime!
MORE TO COME.
I Posted This First On Facebook
Dec. 9th, 2011 07:14 pmAnother Idea I Have NO WAY To Exploit
The other day, the news had a story about two local high school kids who were using a Kinect to develop orthotics (replacement limbs and other such devices) technology.
I just had a more commercial idea, spurred by a conversation at![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ps238principal.
In theory a Kinect can be programmed to take your measurements for apparel sizing. This could even be incorporated into a game software so kids can try being fashion designers. But the "killer app" would be with actual clothiers. They could request this data from customers, and then use it to build virtual mannekins upon which to show off their products.
I don't own an Xbox or a Kinect. I don't know their language. I don't know anybody in the programming or games industry. I do know some people in fashion, but they are all low-tech. Where can I take this idea?
The other day, the news had a story about two local high school kids who were using a Kinect to develop orthotics (replacement limbs and other such devices) technology.
I just had a more commercial idea, spurred by a conversation at
ps238principal.In theory a Kinect can be programmed to take your measurements for apparel sizing. This could even be incorporated into a game software so kids can try being fashion designers. But the "killer app" would be with actual clothiers. They could request this data from customers, and then use it to build virtual mannekins upon which to show off their products.
I don't own an Xbox or a Kinect. I don't know their language. I don't know anybody in the programming or games industry. I do know some people in fashion, but they are all low-tech. Where can I take this idea?
Tags:
For my Week 4 entry in the Wishlist sweepstakes at Amazon.com...over on saferacer.com I found the version of Alpine Stars driving suit that The Stig wears on Top Gear. They're on special this season, but I'll never be able to afford to buy one myself. I could probably get a huge chunk of my existing Wishlist for what this one article of clothing costs!
For somebody who can't exactly watch the show I'm becoming a big fan.
As for the Power Lap project, I did a little research. I'd done an estimate from the drawing I had here earlier that it was probably around 1.5 miles around--and then I found a source that told me it is 1.76 miles. If so, completing the circuit in exactly 60 seconds makes the average speed just over 105 mph.
Actually, this makes sense as there are no places to really go flat out, and a lot of hard braking and cornering is involved.
So a little cribsheet to compare to the numbers for The Stig's runs and Celebrity In A Reasonably Priced Car:
Speed to Lap Time
170 km/h = 0:59.7
100 MPH = 1:03.4
160 km/h = 1:03.5
95 MPH = 1:06.7
150 km/h = 1:07.7
90 MPH = 1:10.4
140 km/h = 1:12.5
85 MPH = 1:14.1
130 km/h = 1:18.1
80 MPH = 1:19.2
75 MPH = 1:24.5
120 km/h = 1:24.6
70 MPH = 1:30.5
110 km/h = 1:32.3
65 MPH = 1:37.5
100 km/h = 1:41.5
And anything slower than that, is not important. (To paraphrase Raul Julia in The Gumball Rally)
For somebody who can't exactly watch the show I'm becoming a big fan.
As for the Power Lap project, I did a little research. I'd done an estimate from the drawing I had here earlier that it was probably around 1.5 miles around--and then I found a source that told me it is 1.76 miles. If so, completing the circuit in exactly 60 seconds makes the average speed just over 105 mph.
Actually, this makes sense as there are no places to really go flat out, and a lot of hard braking and cornering is involved.
So a little cribsheet to compare to the numbers for The Stig's runs and Celebrity In A Reasonably Priced Car:
Speed to Lap Time
170 km/h = 0:59.7
100 MPH = 1:03.4
160 km/h = 1:03.5
95 MPH = 1:06.7
150 km/h = 1:07.7
90 MPH = 1:10.4
140 km/h = 1:12.5
85 MPH = 1:14.1
130 km/h = 1:18.1
80 MPH = 1:19.2
75 MPH = 1:24.5
120 km/h = 1:24.6
70 MPH = 1:30.5
110 km/h = 1:32.3
65 MPH = 1:37.5
100 km/h = 1:41.5
And anything slower than that, is not important. (To paraphrase Raul Julia in The Gumball Rally)
Let's start with what I wrote six years ago on the War On Terror. In it, I stated that the intensity in the so-called War was nowhere near what it was in past wars, and that in some ways I had a problem with that.
Got more data yesterday.
A soldier in the National Guard who is deployed to one of the warzones (makes no difference which one: Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen...) has a one in 1000 chance of getting killed and a one in 400 chance of getting wounded to the level of medical discharge eligibility. That's pretty darned low. Compare that to the men who stormed ashore at Anzio, Tarawa, Normandy or Inchon.
Granted, that's the Guard. The regular forces are sent to the hotter of the hot spots. But this is a war with no front line, no rear areas, and where the enemy is supposedly anywhere.
Al-Qaida and the Taliban are horribly ineffective enemies. We're killing far more of them than they are killing of ours. So why isn't the War On Terror won yet? The answer to that riddle may save the world.
Got more data yesterday.
A soldier in the National Guard who is deployed to one of the warzones (makes no difference which one: Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen...) has a one in 1000 chance of getting killed and a one in 400 chance of getting wounded to the level of medical discharge eligibility. That's pretty darned low. Compare that to the men who stormed ashore at Anzio, Tarawa, Normandy or Inchon.
Granted, that's the Guard. The regular forces are sent to the hotter of the hot spots. But this is a war with no front line, no rear areas, and where the enemy is supposedly anywhere.
Al-Qaida and the Taliban are horribly ineffective enemies. We're killing far more of them than they are killing of ours. So why isn't the War On Terror won yet? The answer to that riddle may save the world.
Writer's Block: Blast to the past
Sep. 7th, 2011 02:17 pm[Error: unknown template qotd]
"Take Algebra--now. You'll like it more than Practical Math, and you'll be able to get in the cool Science courses."
"Take Algebra--now. You'll like it more than Practical Math, and you'll be able to get in the cool Science courses."
Tags:
Writer's Block: Upon further review
Jun. 30th, 2011 12:57 pm[Error: unknown template qotd]
I would have my younger self take Algebra in 6th or 7th Grade--if not earlier. That way I probably would have gotten myself on a track to Graduation in High School, at the very least.
I would have my younger self take Algebra in 6th or 7th Grade--if not earlier. That way I probably would have gotten myself on a track to Graduation in High School, at the very least.
Tags:
I Hate Having Nobody To Play With
Jun. 30th, 2011 12:37 amWings of War.
I'm obsessing.
A part of me wants to buy up some LITKO bases and some HBM model planes to go on them.
Another part of me just goaded me into calculating how many Triple-Size bases can be made from a 24" by 48" sheet of Acrylite Plexiglas. (27, more than enough for my existing WW2 1/72nd scale airplane model aviary.)
I want to play.
I don't know anybody near me who plays.
I'll probably be stewing in my own juices for a while longer.
I'm obsessing.
A part of me wants to buy up some LITKO bases and some HBM model planes to go on them.
Another part of me just goaded me into calculating how many Triple-Size bases can be made from a 24" by 48" sheet of Acrylite Plexiglas. (27, more than enough for my existing WW2 1/72nd scale airplane model aviary.)
I want to play.
I don't know anybody near me who plays.
I'll probably be stewing in my own juices for a while longer.
Back To The Ol' Grind
Apr. 16th, 2011 10:08 pmNot that what I'm working on means anything, or that I might get paid for it.
Years ago I was into a wargame put out by Reaper called CAV. It was their "answer to Battletech", with complexity between it and the Mechwarrior "clicky" collectible miniatures game. I was into it basically for the creative aspect of the construction rules...I was dabbling with making up new units and porting ones from other games. When I heard that the construction rules were being phased out in an update, I gave up and only peeked back every so often.
Found out that another edition is in Beta testing, and a new set of construction rules are available in tandem with the game rules. A whole new philosophy is in place; all the possible mecha and vehicle chassis types can be described on only a couple pages. While there are a few avenues for tweaking, the majority of baselines are hardwired in and the new system is a lot simpler.
So I'm going to do my homework and see if I get interesting results updating my stuff from years ago.
Years ago I was into a wargame put out by Reaper called CAV. It was their "answer to Battletech", with complexity between it and the Mechwarrior "clicky" collectible miniatures game. I was into it basically for the creative aspect of the construction rules...I was dabbling with making up new units and porting ones from other games. When I heard that the construction rules were being phased out in an update, I gave up and only peeked back every so often.
Found out that another edition is in Beta testing, and a new set of construction rules are available in tandem with the game rules. A whole new philosophy is in place; all the possible mecha and vehicle chassis types can be described on only a couple pages. While there are a few avenues for tweaking, the majority of baselines are hardwired in and the new system is a lot simpler.
So I'm going to do my homework and see if I get interesting results updating my stuff from years ago.
Tags:
[Error: unknown template qotd]
Not taking pre-Algebra early enough to do me any good in my eventual career track. And not knowing enough to avoid academically toxic schools. In theory I could apply this to my own children, but I will probably never have any.
Not taking pre-Algebra early enough to do me any good in my eventual career track. And not knowing enough to avoid academically toxic schools. In theory I could apply this to my own children, but I will probably never have any.
Tags:
