• 0 Posts
  • 35 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle






  • So, one observer will see those oscillations happen faster than the other?

    Not quite. In each observer’s frame of reference, time appears to pass the same; it’s only when you try to reconcile the between two objects that are not at rest with respect to each other does relativity show up.

    Basically, when you bring someone back to Earth, the observers will find that their watches don’t match up even though both observers experience time passing the same way as normal (because the oberserver is by definition at rest with respect to their own frame of reference).

    TL; DR: Relativity is a pain in the ass and makes no sense in everyday terms.

    edit: disclaimer - I am not a physicist and have not taken physics classes in a decade plus, but I do teach science at a college. I’m going mostly on half-remembered lectures and some random one-off discussions I’ve had with my buddy in the physics department over the past few years.



  • It’s been a long time since I took modern physics, so I’m not positive, but I think you’re right that the moon would have time moving slower, and if your 50ms/day is right (edit: I based this on the moon traveling faster than the earth, but I don’t know anything about gravitational relativity, so that’s probably wrong) then you’d need to do something like skip a second every 20th day on the moon to keep pace with Earth. We could call it an “anti-leap-second”

    Programmers, that seems pretty simple; what’s the big deal? /s


  • No, the moon’s rotation isn’t on a 24-hour cycle. I’m not an astronomer, but I pretty sure since it’s tidally locked to earth and on a 28-day cycle around the earth, a lunar day is actually 28 Earth days, but I’m not actually sure how that would factor into the number of time zones (I’m pretty sure it would be more complicated than just 24 time zones to match 24 time zones on earth, though).

    Plus, I think the speed of the moon relative to the sun is different enough from Earth that you need to take relativity into effect, which is the real headache here.


  • The idea that humans need the diverse micro ecology of earth in order to not become ill over the course of generations is pretty interesting.

    Really pretty well-supported by current science, too. I teach chemistry at a community college, so maybe I’m an outlier, but I read a ton of current research about the importance of diversity in “gut biomes” and the damaging effects of monoculture on global ecology, etc.

    It seems pretty clear that even if engineers could solve the physical and chemical issues with a generation ship, the limiting constraints are almost certainly going to be biological and ecological, and KS Robinson’s estimates for the upper limits seem pretty reasonable based on current knowledge


  • It’s been a bit since I read The Book of the Dead, but isn’t there an ancestry option for skeletons to create something like a phylactery at higher levels?

    Edit: or maybe even for wizards in general?

    Edit 2: “Lich dedication” is an archetype feat with the prerequisites that the user be an expert in crafting, have the ability to cast 6th level spells, and spend 1,600gp to build the soul cage (which deprecated the term “phylactery,” since phylacteries are an active religious artifact in some sects of Judaism).



  • My brother in Christ, you’d best be playing Pathfinder 2. Gnolls are freaking badass PC ancestry (as are must of the other major “monstrous” races like kobolds, gobbos, orcs, and skeletons)

    My list of “characters I long to play if ever I can find a group where I’m not a Forever GM” includes:

    • A radical leftist Redeemer paladin gnoll whose dream to is convince other gnolls that gnolls can show they are better than the rest of the world if they don’t use slavery, and so runs around organizing slave revolts and making dramatic speeches that often devolve into riots.

    • A goblin gunslinger that fights like he’s trying to earn a place in Tucker’s Kobolds

    • A skeleton wizard who’s convinced he’s a lich but really just fucked up the ritual and lost nearly all of his magical knowledge

    • A kobold sorcerer with an inferiority complex that keeps referring to themselves as “dragon born” (which don’t exist in Pathfinder), and thinks that one day their god will elevate them to being an actual dragon

    Edit: some more I just remembered

    • A “poppet” ranger trying to find his lost child (aka The Velveteen Rabbit)

    • A Ratfolk assassin that lives in the sewers and claims they are trying to keep some “grimdank future-past” from happening and keeps muttering to themselves to “find-kill hammer-god”

    • A dhampir cavalier that rides a skeletal horse



  • NielsBohron@lemmy.worldtoStar Wars Memes@lemmy.worldNot Sparks.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I hear what you’re saying, but as a fairly big literary and film snob, I’ll argue that A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back were bubblegum pop approaching art like a well-realized pop music album that transcends being “just entertainment.” I’ll use some music analogies, since that’s where I have the most background:

    Francis Ford Coppola : Steven Spielberg : George Lucas :: Bob Dylan : Neil Young : Paul Simon.

    You’ve got the auteurs that are out make artistic pieces that may or may not be appreciated in their time, you’ve got the prolific hit machines that churn out album after album (movie after movie) of insightful, well-made work, and then you’ve got the pop, “lowest common denominator” creators that can be game changers (esp. with the right collaborators and editing), but also have a lot of dreck in their back catalogs.

    I would argue that despite the OT being pop-friendly action sci-fi, there was artistry present, especially in the special effects, the story telling, and the world-building. I mean, shit, the diegesis alone is pretty much a masterclass in how to build a living, breathing fiction universe, in a way that I’m not sure has ever been surpassed.

    Bottom line: are they kids’ movies? yes. Are they strong enough to stand on their own as significant artistic works in the same echelon as The Godfather? I would argue that Ep. 4-5 are, yes. Am I still answering my own rhetorical questions? Also yes.


  • NielsBohron@lemmy.worldtoStar Wars Memes@lemmy.worldNot Sparks.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    I know, right? As a huge Star Wars nerd who was in middle school when 1 came out, I didn’t even bother to go see 2 in theaters, and to this day I still haven’t seen 3 all the way through because I have such a bad taste in my mouth.

    In fact, the way Lucas shit all over the established lore and canon to produce such a flaming turd turned me off to the entire IP and I didn’t read a Star Wars book or watch a show/movie until I gave Ep 7 a try because my FiL wanted to see it in the theater. That one I actually enjoyed (contrary to popular opinion), and I’ll say that the first season of Mandalorian and Bad Batch was decent, too. I haven’t seen Andor, but I probably will based on everyone’s reviews.

    But the last Star Wars work that I still actually like and that I still think stands on its own two feet was Empire Strikes Back.