The RDA can't do physics

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by Human No More

So now you're questioning actual canon? It's $7500 [etc]

I'm fairly sure I can get a hardware quantum RNG for less than that, which is pretty much the same device. The only difference is the electromagnet for the inducing, and those appear by the million in HDDs and the like.

Early computing was more expensive - FTL communication doesn't even exist yet.

It was more expensive due to a combination of scarcity, and demand. I bet it wasn't that expensive if you somehow had a monopoly on one.

So by your logic, nothing at all should cost more than maybe a few hundred?
Wow.

Once the fabrication process is constructed, which can potentially take millions, then no. If you're smart about it, you might spend $2bn on a new fabricaton facility... which can then spit FTL radios out at 1,000 units a day.

Admittedly, I don't watch doctor who at all so may be completely on the wrong track here, but if it works via sound, then isn't that a mechanism right there? - to expand that into a real point, if there is a mechanism by which something works provided, then doesn't that allow assumptions?

It repairs barbed wire. It makes (non-explosive) things explode. It can switch on car alarms at a distance. It's not sound; It's Time Lord Science™. As I said, we're not supposed to expect it to be founded on any sort of physically correct physics, unlike Avatar. There, we are expected to believe that everything is at least scientifically plausible.

The FTL communications are completely unnecessary as far as plot goes - they were included most likely in an attempt to avoid complaints from people like you who wanted to see their specific favourite technology there. If it wasn't there, you'd be going 'BAAWWW NO FTL COMM'. Until fairly recently, you were pointing out possible mechanisms for one, even.

...Was I? Current physics doesn't recognize any method of FTL comms. I was only extrapolating from what the sources said about how Cameron-FTL™ works.

Also, if he'd taken it and the magnetic explanation for the flying mountains out, he'd have scored points for using real (extrapolated) physics. Writing hard sci-fi is all about inventing as few rules as possible, and sticking by them once you've invented them. You can make two rules go poof without affecting the plot? Yay!

(Though it does affect the plot, however slightly: without it, Quaritch couldn't offer Jake's legs back.)

Then, as I mentioned many posts ago now, you're limited to parallel-only and can only send or receive at one time.

Depending on the amount of pairs you have and the packet size. Also, using more than one clock cycle to transmit one packet is a possibility.

I thought we were discussing the bandwidth issue? Tripling the amount of data required will not speed up the latency at all, and will triple the bandwidth requirement. Sending it three times has noting at all to do with error correction, stop trying to Gish Gallop me or I will stop responding.

We were; I was demonstrating that there are some ECC schemes that will let you ignore some incoming bits and not have to wait for them. (Though triplicate messages do affect ECC in that you can basically ignore it.) Also, I know it'd be stupid to send a triplicate message when we're short on bandwidth, hence my comment about being "completely stupid in this context."

...and that's part of its program. What would happen if you behaved in a wholly unexpected way around it and not just inconsistently within the margin it was developed for?

It will do its best to predict you. Of course it won't be able to do that perfectly; only posthuman AI could do that.

It can't deal with every single eventuality, simply because it is not AI. A human needs to establish what the potential procedures are.

Have you looked at AI research in the last 20 years or so? We have machines that can learn now. Re: "every single eventuality," neither can a human. A human usually does a lot worse.

Building an entirely new system that does not exist at all is a good idea... why?

Cheaper than sending humans. You can build the majority of Skynet your defense system when you get there.

Your original argument said there should be no human oversight at all, and now you're attacking a rebuttal of that point from an entirely different position.

Ideally, there should be no on-site humans at all, but since you don't like the idea of high-bandwidth FTL, I'm settling for a few individuals.

I said not well enough for a 4.4ly distance with a 4.4 year latency. That's a big difference from communicating with someone near- adjacent.

Why are we talking about radio between there and Earth? (FTL, FTW.) You mentioned earlier that remote control robots don't work because of Pandora's magnetic field, and I presented how to engineer around that.

So you somehow, almost religiously, believe that if fusion was needed, it would spontaneously materialise in human knowledge?

If fusion were needed, you'd have every energy production company in the world investing billions each in R&D, so you'll certainly see progress. You'll get something similar to the computing boom of 1990-2005.

Well, it's not only under research right now but anyone with any knowledge of energy knows that there is an impending world energy crisis as the required capacity is not available due to underinvestment in fission, but fusion has not yet magically and instantly succeeded as you believe it would.

Humans are short-sighted? Also, startup cost for fusion is tremendous. Also also, terawatts of power output is hardly a "crisis." What you might get is a stasis, which would be bad, but it'd hardly be the end of the world. It'd just mean power would get more expensive.

There are plenty of stories about such things, I do not understand why you bash Avatar for not having things you wanted to see.

I don't understand why you think I'm bashing Avatar for not having tech I think are "cool." If I wanted posthuman supertech I'd be reading Disapora or something. I'm bashing Avatar for not playing by its own rules, specifically in the areas of spaceship fuel and the completely stupid idea of interstellar mining.

No, but they would for profit when contracts came along.

...Contracts for what? (Also, good luck utilising Unobtanium without industry.)

What I said is that the asteroids that ARE usable will be - the smaller and less reachable ones will not unless demand outstrips supply by enough at some point in the future.

Yes, but exploiting even the most useless of asteroids requires maybe 100,000 times less energy than shipping stuff to Pandora. The delta-v required to completely escape the solar system is something like 30km/s. Getting to Pandora requires 1,000x that delta-v, and the rocket equation means that you need exponentially more fuel for a given increase in delta-v.

...then what makes you think it hasn't been done?

A dead Earth isn't much of a concern if you can build O'Neil cylinders.

PS. you can not build anything out of energy.

'Course you can, just put it into some baryons and mash them together.
Though I was more talking about the energy budget for gathering and constructing the existing materials for an O'Neil cylinder, since the former is just inefficient.

...and in 143 years?

Still won't happen, probably, unless we get space elevators or something.

Not if you've never been there so don't even now what you're trying to produce, not to mention a detailed analysis of its composition and structure...

Whereas the probes we're sending into the solar sytem aren't looking for anything new, they're looking for geological/biological evidence. I'm sure if there was a reason to include colour photography, NASA would stick one on. Also, remember Moore's Law.

Yet again - there is no reason Earth's power output isn't higher. You're saying it's unrealistic with current rates, but that does not make it impossible. [etc]

I'm saying it's unrealistic with completely ridiculous future rates. The 890GJ/year figure I gave above translates to 22.2kW, every second of every day. I don't use that much, and I wouldn't have any idea what to do with it if I did. Do you?

And again, megastructures are unlikely because 1) the manual doesn't mention them, 2) the manual(s) mention fusion power. Fusion power is nigh-irrelevant in the shadow of a megastructure.

Emphasis on stable. I was just providing it as an aside to illustrate the actual strength of 100T - it is not something reachable so easily. In retropspect, a better one that wouldn't have let you off would have been stating that Earth's field is 3x10^-5T.

That was "stable." (Though they degrade quite quickly for obvious reasons.) I think the maximum unstable one was in the range of 700T.

...And yeah, Earth's magnetic field is 30uT. How high is Pandora's supposed to be? Even 1mT, standing, would have negligible effect on any sort of electronics or sensor, AFAIK.

1. That's a huge assumption to make.
2. They behave like it in limiting superconductivity, yes, but 100T is NOT at all equal to even a low temperature.

That's what I meant. A magnetic field is going to have similar effects to high temperature in a superconductor.

Yes, but that's a long time in the future. Unobtainium-related profit may well be funding your research fantasy.

That'd be... amazing, considering the energy content involved.