We have been sharing dragon, yes? I would like to invite you to a special uniqueness I've discovered.
I adore this artist. I cannot tell you how much I ache for the genre of "Is Big Scary. Clearly capable of verifying monster bad repuation, but is actually a sweet, emotional and just like everyone else."
Would you like to see Sanzo's (only name I know the artist by) Mrs. Natsuki, the New Part-Timer?... if he has published manga, I would buy truckloads.
Her magic looks pretty good - solid balancing all round there. However, the rest of her abilities appear quite unbalanced in range and magnitude and most people in her life have done her dirty, which seems primarily to be a way of enhancing the impressiveness of her skills via emphasising how self-made she is and how much adversity she's overcome (as well as how many justified reasons she has to be angry at everyone and sundry). She's exceptionally skilled at apparently everything save magic, including literature, music, dance, anything involving analytic thinking skills, martial arts, athletics, household skills, street savviness, mechanical engineering, military service, and acting. She reached colonel rank, she has a lifetime pension, she has screeds of medals, she somehow survived all sorts of death missions, she caught the eye of Bruce Lee, she has four degrees, she could have gotten platinum records if she'd chosen to, she starred in all sorts of martial arts movies, she literally made history as being involved in the first use of magic in modern warfare, her groundbreaking use of magic was a major factor in her side winning a seemingly hopeless battle, Lazel changed up the whole school due to her, she apparently built a tank museum - this is a lot of achievements, and they encompass a far greater range and magnitude of skills than possessed by any other character in this RP. Further to this, her family did her dirty, several governments did her dirty, assorted music and movie critics did her dirty, and Salem did her dirty, which pretty much constitutes all pivotal players in her life except Alex, Bruce Lee, and her former dance instructor, which means she can play the martyr in regards to any part of her life whatsoever and be perfectly justified in doing so. In short, these are Too Many Things compared to all the things that other characters have, and probably either about half of these will need to be cut or most of them will need to be nerfed. In aid of this, it seems to me that it would be best to remove the long-lived trait of kitsune to maintain the action-packed vibe of her life while justifying why she's not overpowered by the time she's spent a century doing action-packed stuff (although this is up to you). If you want to use characters who have seen plenty of history, there's always the time travel subplot now that you could use to add an extra character to the mix (maybe Alex came from the past after taking part in all these history-making battles and they got together a few years before the present day?). Salem is still not a hill to die on, though, and the mages that constituted the early university would not be "elitist and borderline aristocratic" with "unflinching ideas about magic", since at this point most mages are essentially a suppressed global diaspora discovering a unified and independent identity for the first time in history - you can't have an aristocracy where no society existed, and these mages are an extremely diverse bunch due to being individually embedded in every culture on the planet. In addition, even if Miko wasn't able to properly control her magic in practice, she should have been able to get a certificate that she wasn't a risk to anyone as long as she didn't actively use her magic around others - it's only people like Druantia who are constantly at risk of losing control that wouldn't be able to get such a certificate to go on to a normal job. As long as you can keep your powers to yourself you'd be safe enough to work, essentially, and since her magic is primarily passive it doesn't seem like it would constitute a make-or-break issue. I can tell how much effort and historical nuance you put into this version of her, and I'm quite sorry for such an extensive critique - if I could approve her I would, but she's just too skilled at everything for it to be fair at the moment. I'd be more than happy to work it through with you piece by piece if you like, though.
Hi sir tell me a nice dream you had lately
- Show previous comments 7 more
It means ten years before parole for me and a countersuit alleging that your actions in sustaining several of our mutually complimentary conversations amounted to entrapment in the legal sense.
However due to the terms of my plea deal I can get away with a single rakish wink on my way out of court
so I was listening to this song and a thought occurred to me: Earth's sun and moon look almost exactly the same size in the sky, but there is no natural reason for this, it's just an incredible coincidence which I think is so cool. Apparently the sun is 400 times as wide as the moon AND 400 times as far away. This is very unlikely and very satisfying
but as I was typing all this another thought occurred to me: IS it a coincidence? Since there is a such a thing as a "habitable zone," i.e. a planet can only support life if it is a certain distance from its star, it's reasonable to think that on any hypothetical life-supporting planet, one's star looks approximately the same size in the sky as the sun does to us. But what about the moon? Is there a correlation between a celestial object becoming a moon to a planet and this moon's mass/distance from its planet (i.e. its size in the sky)? Maybe not but that got me curious about how big various moons in our solar system look in their respective planets' skies. And someone made a thing about that which was really cool to see: http://umich.edu/~lowbrows/reflections/2008/jmaguran.1.html
That link has some really fascinating information I thought, especially in the table at the bottom. For the moons in the table, I calculated the correlation between their distance from their planet and their diameter. The correlation coefficient was just -.17, which is pretty weak with a sample size of 23 observations. So it does seem to be just a coincidence that our moon looks like a very similar size to our sun
interesting stuff idk i should probably be asleep or doing something productive
- Show previous comments 1 more
I just gotta get a good lecture out of my system every now and then otherwise my brain gets intellectually constipated and next thing you know it's grotesquely swollen with knowledge beyond mortal ken and the very laws of nature shatter before my whims and the screams of sundered galaxies fill a once-bright cosmos
Also don't forget to like and subscribe with the link below *cheesy outro music*
Duality changed their profile photo
There's no official ruling on what goes into Acronyms?!!?
I have never been so disgusted.
Allot me an example, albeit fictitious. T.A.R.D.I.S stands for (and do correct me here, anybeing) Time And Relative Dimension In Space. The joining or "Stopwords" are implied and therefore irrelevent. The actual name, what it is being shorthand for is technical knowledge important to only those who would need to refer to it by its full name. Therefore attempts to add more letters in to make an acronym more pronounceable as a word to the average Layman is a fallacy! The Layman isn't supposed to need the acronym! He can just call it "That Box"! Fuh!
Clearly, the Technically Right name for the Timelord's conveyance is The T.R.D.S! The Doctor flies around in TRDS! It truly is only respectable to speak of TRDS! I see nothing silly about this!
I require thou input on this most expounded of pontificators!
Acronyms tend to be quite informal, so the layman is usually the target audience. As long as you don't inconsistently leave some joining words out of the acronym while leaving others in (i.e., TARDS) it's not too ill-formed. There's no official ruling on a lot of things that are blights upon our already-blighted language, which is basically the only reason we have journalistic standards (APA might say something on the topic).
On a slightly related note, 'Time and Relative Dimension in Space' is hands down the worst name for anything I've heard in my life. For a start, it doesn't say anything about what the thing actually is (since the TARDIS is not, itself, time or space or any 'relative dimension', unless there's some really weird Doctor Who lore lurking somewhere I haven't heard) and furthermore time isn't in space and there aren't any 'relative dimensions' in space either. It fails to describe its subject, it implies bizarre falsehoods, and as a result it holds no meaning whatsoever except as an arbitrary sequence of phonemes associated with an object (fictional, at that). It's like a philosophical thought experiment designed to stretch the boundaries of what can realistically be called meaningful.
Technically, The TARDIS is mostly the pocket dimension produced by the alien machine. I do believe it is named after its result, not its specific mechanics.
Like a can opener.
Ya don’t call it “Circular Blade at top of Gear Tower Placement.”
Besides, it’s technically a whole seperate alien culture with its own naming conventions.
Way I read it, there is an awful lot of technical specifics left off. It is more like: Time (manipulation) and (its relation to the) Relative Dimension (as produced together in conjuction to a seperate zone of what is outside of it) in (its exterior) Space
Basically, a Time Bubble. Housed by supporting mechanics. Breaking causal relation to time & space outside of it can't be done by merely one or several devices. You know how many times that thing has broken down? ...to produce drama for the episode? Why, one time it even became sentient! And confessed a crush on the Doctor! But I do suppose having a being live inside you would tend to promote complicated feelings.
I know that's usually the case with tapeworms.
But now I've forgotten what we were talking about!
Edit: (Yes, I hadn't even left the page.)
Oh yes, I was having an internal mental implosion over your intonation of informality.
The whole POINT of acronym-ing is to convey technical knowledge! As in, naming something in regards to the specifics of its use, to those of whom would also be in privvy to what aspects stand for, to the point of not requiring the whole of the name to identify the subject referred. Which is why A.S.P.C.A works. You know what it stands for, because you know what to go to that organization for.
You can't just tell someone to hand you the M.F.P and expect them to know it means My Fluffy Pillow! We have RULES and ORDER so that we may FUNCTION as a WHOLE, FUNCTIONING SOCIETY! Anything less than perfection is ANARCHY!! ANARCHY!!!
Oh, pardon me. Think my OC needs a calming bath.
I'm not your Original Character.
Nope, that stands for Obsessive Compulsive.
Oh, I can go for that. .... ....WHY IS MY HAIR NEVER SYMETRICAL?!!? SYM-METRY! SYM-METRY!!
Hi sir have you heard of this bundle
It's 1500 games for 5 bucks with all proceeds going to charity
Some of the games are usually worth 25 bucks by themselves so it's about 8000 dollars worth of content
I don't know if you're the gamer type but even if you're not there's a bunch of game creation tools and tilesets in there too to give extra bang for your exceedingly few bucks
The Equation of Time, huh?...
I find that quite intriguing. Time, as I see it, is the relation of observable objects between each other. In fact, I find it quite surprising that technically, time passes differently on other planets by merit of their axis-...es. Plural. So, you could say you would require entirely different time terminology on Uranus. Like, longer seconds, man.
I suppose it wouldn't be too Farfetch'd to say that Time is Math. ...and not the other way around; for Math certainly involves far more than just what is observable, like the revolution of planets.
In fact, I seem to recall that "days" on some planets, like Mercury last for basically months at a time. Just because 12 hours have passed, doesn't mean the Light has faded to Night. Perhaps more elaboration on terms would be required for such?
I am very much interested in math as it relates to Time. For if Time is how we are positioned to the Sun... perhaps there is some comfort in knowing things are where they typically are. Roughly. On estimate.
Time doesn't pass differently on different planets due to their differing rotations - rather, 'one day' as a unit of time is simply defined as 'one rotation of a planet around its axis' and thus differs for each planet. Seconds aren't directly defined in terms of planetary rotation, so they may be said to stay the same length no matter what planet you're on.
There are several very different aspects of time that should be separated here: time in terms of dimensionality, time in terms of change, and time in terms of its units.
Units of time are essentially arbitrary. The various defined lengths of days and seconds and months and spins around the sun and whatnot have as little bearing on the actual nature of time as the difference between centimeters and inches has on the nature of space. The equation of time is also quite arbitrary in that it's just a conversion between sundial readings and digital clock readings - modern clocks are no longer based on the position of the sun in the sky, but are based on how fast a caesium atom oscillates under carefully defined conditions (as per the SI definition of a second). This is because the oscillation of a caesium atom is the most precisely regular 'tick-tock' rhythm in the known universe, and is thus the most reliably accurate thing we can base our clocks on.
Time in terms of dimensionality is where we start talking about spacetime. Space and time are a single unified Thing, constituting the four dimensions of our universe (length, breadth, height, and time). This combination space-time Thing is warped by matter in a phenomenon known as 'gravity', which causes time to distort such that some caesium atoms can tick at different rates to other caesium atoms. However, this effect can be accounted for and eliminated in our calculations and clocks, so fortunately our caesium-based time-unit definition still works good.
Time in terms of change is what distinguishes time from breadth, height and depth, even though all four of these are facets of a single dimensional Thing. Nobody knows what change actually is or why we perceive it to occur, and there are several horrifyingly difficult logical and physical problems intrinsic to defining it. This is the aspect of time that we really don't understand on any level.
Maths includes all three of these aspects of time, I'm sure you'll be thrilled to know - the four broad subjects of mathematics are Quantity, Dimensionality, Change and Structure, and the first three of these are quite similar to the mentioned notions of time in terms of units, time in terms of dimensions, and time in terms of change, respectively. I don't think time can be said to have a 'structure', as such, but we can't expect any single concept to measure up to mathematics.
@Duality now i remember you!!!! You're the smart one! Sup
based on how fast a caesium atom oscillates under carefully defined conditions
But doesn't that seem disingenuous? If it only acts like that because you made up a situation where it was forced to do that, and not what it does typically, aren't you just inventing arbitrary measurements again?
I was under the impression Time was related to basically how much Light there was. ...Uhh, when it was day time. So arguably, if your on another planet where the days last much longer, then so too must the hours be longer. Hours are fractions of a day, so if the day is longer... then every other measurement has to be bumped up to match, yes?
What does Dimensionality mean?
What i'm thinking is: Speed is refered to as Distance Covered over Time. So yeah, it follows that Space & Time are metaphorically married in the sense that you can't tell how much time has passed if you can't distinguish the amount of what has changed, and you can't determine how much space has been covered if you aren't aware of how long it took. Roughly, that it all comes back around to how things relate to each other. Time is relations.
Time is Friendship! Time is Magic!
Hey man, I found some pictures on Space Engine you might like. I went on a journey to find some water worlds. I didn't expect I'd find a whole lot. I was surprised.
This is a comet in another star system I happened to stumble across.
In a system near that comet I found this beauty, ring system and all.
This planet has storms. It has storms and it has water! Here's where things get weird though. The water appears to be 101 C.
This didn't stop the planet from generating water on the surface! But I got hot just thinking about it. Still, here we see clouds, water, and sand from a desert. Also the rings from earlier!
The water is meeting the desert here. The sun is making it look like silver. I'm almost getting a mercury feel from it!
The water here forms a river. Unfortunately I could not see the rings from this angle.
I decided to see how deep the water in that river was. I didn't think it would be all that deep Duality. Have to be honest here.
Turns out it was 864 meters in depth! Not sure if it looks like it from here, or if we'd even be seeing light. But Space Engine's still considered early access I think. So we'll have to excuse that sort of thing for now!
All in all, a gorgeous planet, If a bit barren, of course. I'm afraid most of that water is going away. But we got to see it now, and that's pretty cool!
Not that far away I found another planet with water on it, or so the filters promised.
It looks like a cookie not safe for human consumption to me. I spy a few islands here and there. This planet is young. The temperatures are quite hot at 76 C, but not hot enough for the oceans to boil away. If I didn't know any better, I'd say we were looking at the beginning of a water world here!
And a RINGED one at that!
This is sunrise from what I believe is one day going to become a large river or lake. It had the appearance of a crater. I wouldn't be surprised if this planet's late heavy bombardment was just a few days ago, in terms of the universe that is.
This planet has active volcanos which will help in terms of fertility and temperature management in the long run. Provided, of course, they don't go off nonstop! This volcano has a height of approximately 16 km! It's twice the size of mount everest, yet it pales in comparison to Olympus Mons (who enjoys a height of around 22 km!)
As we see, no life on the bottom yet. Or maybe just not rendered by the game. But the water is quite dark down here!
Afraid I forgot to note the depth on this one. Sorry man.
Here we see another such planet. It doesn't look like much from here, but this was probably the most comfortable temperature I saw, at just a mildly toasty 58C.
Did I mention it's got gorgeous aurorae? And I see another volcano down there too! It wouldn't surprise me if I took a picture of that very volcano and got it mixed up with the previous planet. It's likely, knowing me.
The desert's not winning this fight, Duality. it looks like the water is taking over here! I can even see a drop down around the peninsula. Looks like quite a steep drop. Maybe it was a chasm or a canyon? Someone dropped the world and it cracked? Who knows?
This is another such peninsula. It makes me feel kind of like standing on the edge and waiting for Jack from Titanic to hold me. Only I'd scoot over and let him on the big door with me...
I believe that's all I had for you today man. I really hope you enjoyed them though, and if you have anything special you want to see don't hesitate to ask! Keep looking up!
I have a severe question Duality. It hurts. Help me.
I read that the universe is flat. I’m having difficulty understanding that as a mechanic for lack of a better world. Can you explain it in a simplistic manner? If the universe is flat, why does it seem so... round to us?
- Show previous comments 1 more
I see! I read once that, if you could see far enough to see the limits of the universe itself, you would see the back of your own head, and if you could travel at a speed sufficient go beat the rate of expansion, you would never escape the universe but would eventually wind up right back where you started. Mind such a theory is a bunch of conjecture that requires us to manage to beat the rate of expansion (which is impossible with our current technology and inconceivable out to the distant future), but is that not true if you take away such assumptions?
Google Maps once told me I was in Alaska when I was in my home town which is nowhere near Alaska.
Nobody knows for certain, but it doesn't look like it at the moment. That's another example of a 'looped dimension', which don't appear to occur in our universe (although this may just be because our instruments aren't precise enough to detect them).
Probably caused by a black hole created by CERN. Software is clearly infallible as we all know.
I was about to ask if a wormhole would constitute a looped dimension, but from what I understand those may theoretically occur in black holes, which are “holes” in the universe, for lack of a better word.
I often wonder what it would be like to witness another dimension with my own eyes. Instead of conjecture or picturing it, seeing it myself. Were I to somehow leave the universe or go to another universe (assuming the multiverse theory is true), who is to say I could survive there even with a suit? What if the laws of physics are so out of it there I am killed immediately?
I tried jogging to the end of the universe just last week and only made it about halfway
There are certain moments in a game where you realise you've made a terrible mistake. Following a fleetingly-glimpsed doppleganger into a poorly lit passageway was definitely one of them.
- Show previous comments 8 more
Some recommendations would be great, actually! I have all the world at my fingertips but don't know what to look for.
Actually, most dirt is eroded rock, small particles settled out of flowing water, or small particles settled out of the air after volcanic eruptions! Topsoil is the brown stuff that sits on top of most dirt (usually only a foot deep), and that's mostly plant remains. Of that, only a small fraction is bug excreta, unless you're looking at a region with a lot of worms. Can't beat me here, I'm afraid - dirt is my job.