[OOC] Myriad Reality

[Valiance]

<Snipped quote by Valiance>

What did Sven do for the government?

@Balance

He was the Mayor. Which, in respect to Waternaux, is like President.

[Balance]

<Snipped quote by Balance>

He was the Mayor. Which, in respect to Waternaux, is like President.

@Valiance

Thanks.

[Valiance]

<Snipped quote by Valiance>

Thanks.

@Balance

And whatever you write, I'll probably edit it at some point to include lore, minir details, and other such things.

[DarkwolfX37]

<Snipped quote by Balance>

The servers refused to update.

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Again, we need to study interplanetary travel here before it is even possible to attempt it. Antimatter is possible to be created now, but does not exist in large quantities in the universe because it becomes light when colliding with matter. We need to focus on Nuclear Fusion, and antimatter is the next step.

<Snipped quote by Balance>

I am capable of assisting you.

@LegendBegins

Yes, which requires solar system testing, aka space.
That's highly theoretical, unless the theories have changed, most astronomers, ya know, people who study space like we're talking about, would say that's not the case, and antimatter near the planet would be very easily disastrous.
We. Are. Running. Out. Of. Planet. I don't know how you expect to get past that without space investment barring religious answers.

[Host]

<Snipped quote by LegendBegins>

Yes, which requires solar system testing, aka space.
That's highly theoretical, unless the theories have changed, most astronomers, ya know, people who study space like we're talking about, would say that's not the case, and antimatter near the planet would be very easily disastrous.
We. Are. Running. Out. Of. Planet. I don't know how you expect to get past that without space investment barring religious answers.

@DarkwolfX37

When we get to that point. We're nowhere close.
Antimatter is decently understood at this point. It's simply particles on opposite paths and the like; you can look it up.
The fact is that we have quite a bit of time before the planet is uninhabitable. Several hundred years at least, with new advances in renewable resources. However, I believe humanity (sans rapture) will easily destroy itself within a hundred years.
If you're referring to overpopulation, it isn't particular a major ordeal at this point; we simply need to expedite food production, which can easily be done. There is a long way to go before Earth is unsustainable.

[DarkwolfX37]

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

When we get to that point. We're nowhere close.
Antimatter is decently understood at this point. It's simply particles on opposite paths and the like; you can look it up.
The fact is that we have quite a bit of time before the planet is uninhabitable. Several hundred years at least, with new advances in renewable resources. However, I believe humanity (sans rapture) will easily destroy itself within a hundred years.
If you're referring to overpopulation, it isn't particular a major ordeal at this point; we simply need to expedite food production, which can easily be done. There is a long way to go before Earth is unsustainable.

@Host

>In large part because we stopped investing in it.
Bleh.
Anywhere as soon as our lifetimes. Not even counting the almost inevitable nuclear war coming up, not enough countries are doing renewable resource advancement, and if we get a republican president then that's a guaranteed stop in pretty much all progress on it in the us.
On overpopulation, we're already starving half the world, and people are multiplying exponentially. We'll have a billion more in a generation or sooner, we don't have enough land left for housing or food, and any land we do take is further harming the environment. Again, as soon as our lifetimes we could run out of planet. The sooner we get to work making mars livable to some degree, the sooner we can go into livable planets outside the solar system, and the sooner we can stop worrying about needing to limit population. Bonus points if we can get rid of some of the class disparity across the planet so we'll have less starving or dying of disease, and perfect score if we can get a peaceful easing into anarchy like I dream of. Obviously not likely by any stretch, but hey, it solves all our problems.

[Etcetera]

<Snipped quote by Host>

>In large part because we stopped investing in it.
Bleh.
Anywhere as soon as our lifetimes. Not even counting the almost inevitable nuclear war coming up, not enough countries are doing renewable resource advancement, and if we get a republican president then that's a guaranteed stop in pretty much all progress on it in the us.
On overpopulation, we're already starving half the world, and people are multiplying exponentially. We'll have a billion more in a generation or sooner, we don't have enough land left for housing or food, and any land we do take is further harming the environment. Again, as soon as our lifetimes we could run out of planet. The sooner we get to work making mars livable to some degree, the sooner we can go into livable planets outside the solar system, and the sooner we can stop worrying about needing to limit population. Bonus points if we can get rid of some of the class disparity across the planet so we'll have less starving or dying of disease, and perfect score if we can get a peaceful easing into anarchy like I dream of. Obviously not likely by any stretch, but hey, it solves all our problems.

@DarkwolfX37

This is accurate. But with a several trillion dollar debt, what do you expect?

Liberals will spend it all on letting more people sign up for welfare.

I don't know if you're aware of how rare Earth-like planets are. It's entirely probable that this is the only inhabitable planet in the universe, but I won't argue this since you believe in an infinite universe, while I believe in a finite one.

Half the world isn't starving. Less than a billion are.

The environment isn't as bad as a lot of propaganda makes it out to be. We do need to fix some of the policies, though. Deforestation being one of them.

[DarkwolfX37]

It greatly bothers me that people thought the minecraft ending was telling them not to play anymore. It literally says exactly what it means and people apparently ignored it.

[Host]

It greatly bothers me that people thought the minecraft ending was telling them not to play anymore. It literally says exactly what it means and people apparently ignored it.

@DarkwolfX37

Story Mode?

[souleaterfan320]

youtu.be/hj6pL1mJUIU

Literally mordric's theme.

[Etcetera]

Joke of the Day: What do you call Data when he is used to expand memory?

...

SATA.

[Balance]

<Snipped quote by Balance>

And whatever you write, I'll probably edit it at some point to include lore, minir details, and other such things.

@Valiance

myriad-reality.wikia.com/wiki/Waternau..

[DarkwolfX37]

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

This is accurate. But with a several trillion dollar debt, what do you expect?

Liberals will spend it all on letting more people sign up for welfare.

I don't know if you're aware of how rare Earth-like planets are. It's entirely probable that this is the only inhabitable planet in the universe, but I won't argue this since you believe in an infinite universe, while I believe in a finite one.

Half the world isn't starving. Less than a billion are.

The environment isn't as bad as a lot of propaganda makes it out to be. We do need to fix some of the policies, though. Deforestation being one of them.

@Etcetera

To be fair, hillary won't do shit and idk Bernie's views on the space program, but at least he plans to be able to pay for the changes he proposes.

Yeah, but even in a finite the size of even just the known universe makes it almost certain there are others. Not to mention that that only applies to life as we know it, and doesn't factor in other possible kinds of life. There's a huge chance one of jupiter's moons has life on it. I think Io but it's been since 10th grade so idk if that was it.

I don't remember what the number was. I feel like I heard half.

Environment might be past the point of no return but that's a long ways off anyway. Mhm.

[DarkwolfX37]

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Story Mode?

@Host

Yeah.

[Host]

<Snipped quote by Etcetera>

To be fair, hillary won't do shit and idk Bernie's views on the space program, but at least he plans to be able to pay for the changes he proposes.

Yeah, but even in a finite the size of even just the known universe makes it almost certain there are others. Not to mention that that only applies to life as we know it, and doesn't factor in other possible kinds of life. There's a huge chance one of jupiter's moons has life on it. I think Io but it's been since 10th grade so idk if that was it.

I don't remember what the number was. I feel like I heard half.

Environment might be past the point of no return but that's a long ways off anyway. Mhm.

@DarkwolfX37

Hillary doesn't know how.

There are more Anthropic variables than distance from the sun. In fact, the amount of necessary variables for a planet with conditions sustainable for life amount to a probability greater than the number of atoms in the universe. At best, we could build a bio-dome, but even then the chances are only slightly increased. A bit less than the number of atoms in the universe.

That's not very much in the scope of things, and it's mostly in developing countries.

[DarkwolfX37]

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Hillary doesn't know how.

There are more Anthropic variables than distance from the sun. In fact, the amount of necessary variables for a planet with conditions sustainable for life amount to a probability greater than the number of atoms in the universe. At best, we could build a bio-dome, but even then the chances are only slightly increased. A bit less than the number of atoms in the universe.

That's not very much in the scope of things, and it's mostly in developing countries.

@Host

There are tons of counters to that argument that show it to be false but I can't recite any off the top of my head.

Meh. It's something likely to kill us, especially as the environment gets worse.

[souleaterfan320]

David, check Skype, you'll really like it.

[souleaterfan320]

You too, whiz.

[Balance]

<Snipped quote by Host>
Mierno:

Hmm...

*looks to ridge*

Is there anything I could aide you with? I am currently available, as shinji and David have yet to send me any info on things they need done.

Dane: *is sitting in a chair*

Hm.. Where's that new guy..

Kyen: *walks through the front door, and closes it*

Dane: ah, Ren, was it?

Kyen: it's Kyen.

Dane: ah, sorry.

Kyen: it's OK.

@souleaterfan320

I thought we kicked him out. He shouldn't be staying in the base, not with the group barely knowing him. That doesn't make any sense.

[Host]

I just had an insane quantum hypothesis. So, Einstein theorized that the vacuum of space is not truly "nothing," but instead a concept called the "Ether." This is an intangible, not directly observable "substance" that is the cause of gravity among other things. He proposed that gravity exists because this creates a field similar to a three dimensional tarp. Similar to how objects roll into a an indent in a tarp, made larger and more dramatic the heavier the object is, the mass of an object causes all other objects (that have their own attraction, proportional to their mass) to be attracted to it in three dimensional space, an effect we call "gravity." I propose an alternative theory: the Ether of a vacuum is not intangible; in fact, it is entirely tangible, but in the same way a gas is tangible. A solid has definite mass, volume, and shape. A liquid has definite mass and volume, but an indefinite shape. A gas has a definite mass, but an indefinite volume and shape. A plasma is similar to a gas in terms of these properties, but has its own differences. What if Ether has indefinite mass, volume, and shape? In fact, the only way to detect its mass would be to weigh the universe itself, and to subtract all matter from it. Ether could even have a different form of "mass" that may or may not be definite. Regardless of what constitutes as mass of Ether is irrelevant to the discourse, as it may not be "felt" in the same way a solid or a liquid could, but the effects can be seen through gravity. In fact, an obvious trait of a vacuum is the approach to zero pressure. What if pressure is a direct and observable trait of Ether, or a lack of it? The more pressure, the less Ether there is, and the less pressure there is, the more Ether there is. This contributes to an inverse correlation between Ether mass/volume (it may be determined that one is responsible instead of the other, or that they're one in the same) and pressure. Because of this, we can say that it is possible that gravity is caused by the pressure correlation caused by ether. For instance, in a vacuum, one planet has an extremely high gravitational pull. It is possible that this gravitational pull is due to the lack of Ether (also existing between molecules, which explains density and its relation to mass as well), in which all surrounding Ether is attracted to the matter at hand in order to fill the "pressure gap." For comprehension purposes, consider the concepts of mass and vacuum to be switched. From the perspective of the Ether, all matter is "nothing," because no Ether exists there, and is therefore pushed toward the matter in question. Because Ether is attempting to "fill the space" the matter is in, the matter is pulled apart as the Ether does so, contrary to our current perspective where adding more matter and increasing pressure (decreasing Ether, but this will not be considered, due to the avoidance of potential circular reasoning), due to an increased number of particles. The more pressure/matter there is, the more energy it takes to add more. This forces the matter together as there is less space to move around in, and matter attempts to "escape" the confined area (what we describe as pressure) and move to an area of lower pressure, because energy naturally moves from higher states to lower ones. If we consider Ether to have inverse properties when introduced to matter, and similar properties in relation to Ether, Ether will attempt to fill the "space" in which matter exists by moving into it, if it can. This is low pressure from our perspective. So Ether attempts to move energy into lower states as well, and in this case, it would be where matter exists. So this inverse correlation causes pressure to behave the way it does. Now, gravity factors into this a similar way. If matter is influenced by Ether, Ether could potentially move it. If this is the case, then when the Ether moves and "pushes" on the mass (the more mass, the greater the pressure and more the Ether is pushed toward it in order to "fill the space"), this creates something similar to a current if a current could be static: a variation in energy densities (though "energy" would likely be classified as a different substance in relation to Ether). Because of these variations of "energy" densities, a higher density is formed around objects of greater mass; this means that matter is attracted to these areas of higher densities (because pressure and density are correlated as well, and we can assume that Ether also fills space within the electron cloud of atoms and between atoms, and even possibly within the nucleus itself). This creates the effect we know as "gravity." Ether surrounds this matter (and the denser the matter, the less Ether there is, causing the gravity to increase with pressure), which causes more matter to be attracted to it, not because matter is attracted to matter, but because matter is attracted to Ether, which is in higher "concentrations" around objects of higher mass. The higher the Ether concentrations, the higher the attraction, creating what we know as "gravity." The benefit of this over Einstein's theory (while still entirely probable) is that this hypothesis does not require a "tarp" that we can only imagine, particularly in three dimensional space, and instead uses properties of matter that we are already well aware of. This potentially also explains the mystery of "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy." If these substances that we cannot observe directly but affect the gravitational movement of other matter in the universe is actually Ether (in both matter and energy forms, if applicable), it solves a great portion of the mystery of what this actually is, how it works, and how it composes 95% of the universe without being observable, as what we classify as "empty space" is actually the "dark matter" we've been looking for the whole time.