newtonian motion

dumbluck · #1 July 11th, 2001, 11:48 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
wow, remember playing asteroids and you would try to see how fast you could go if you just kept pushing the throttle and wrapping around the screen? pretty soon you would just be a blur. what do you mean im the only one that did that?
[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 09 July 2001).]

I can assure you, you were _NOT_ the only one that did that!

Puke · #2 July 11th, 2001, 12:36 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Quikngruvn:
Puke, when you say 'free space', so you mean space in the system map or space in general? Turning costs wouldn't figure in system movement, since it's not nearly as time- and reflex-critical as tactical combat.

But, even in space, everything has momentum, based on its mass and velocity. A ship wanting to turn 180 degrees would have to (a) engage manuevering thrusters to turn the ship; (b) engage additional maneuvering thrusters to keep the ship from veering to the side while turning; and (c) engage main thrusters when finally turned around to overcome the original forward velocity.

beats the hell out of me, when did i say 'free space?'

I think i was talking about both tac and strategic movement though, and I think my general idea was that you can turn on a dime by using principals (a) and (b) you describe. immagine a ship fires a thruster on the starboard side of the bow, and simultaniously fires one on the port side of the stern in 180degree opposition. it will spin in place, regardless of linear momentum. it should be able to do it fairly quickly, too (especially if it has enough overall thrust to cross a solar system in the space of a month). to stop turning, its the same process in reverse. principal (c) need not be applied unless you want to do something more than just turn. which is why i started talking about facings and such sillyness.

this would of course work on strategic map scale too, if you could build up velocity, would you have to slow down before hitting a planet? stands to reason that half your trip would be acceleration and the other half deceleration. what would happen if you hit a wormhole at some velocity? come out at the same velocity? what happens if you hit a map edge on the strategic map?

capnq · #3 July 11th, 2001, 02:50 PM

quote:
when did i say 'free space?'

You didn't; what you said was:

quote:
turning should be free in space

------------------
Cap'n Q

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

Puke · #4 July 11th, 2001, 06:15 PM

quote:
Originally posted by capnq:
You didn't; what you said was:

I guess I am lost on the context of the question for that one. I hope I got the reply right? if not, feel free to ask again, i can be thick sometimes.

edit: I read it again. i was talking about tactical movement, so i got the answer right, at least half way. and since knowing is half the battle (presumeably the other half), and now that I know what we are talking about, I can now say for certainty that I have won. thank you for playing.

------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 11 July 2001).]

Quikngruvn · #5 July 11th, 2001, 08:36 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Puke:
I read it again. i was talking about tactical movement, so i got the answer right, at least half way. and since knowing is half the battle (presumeably the other half), and now that I know what we are talking about, I can now say for certainty that I have won. thank you for playing.

Certainty? Heisenberg would be spinning in his grave....

But getting back to your ship wanting to do a U-turn with a thruster on port and starboard. Assuming these thrusters are offset from the center of the ship (near bow or stern, otherwise they would just cancel each other), a ship could indeed spin around very quickly, assuming it generates the necessary thrust to make the ship spin, and then the counter-thrust to stop it from rotating.

But figure this: if a ship can generate a fixed amount of energy per turn for thrust, then some of that energy must be diverted to the rotating thrusters to spin. Bigger ships, having more mass, would require more thrust to spin the same rate as a less massive ship. Thus, spinning costs more the bigger the ship.

The difference with the strategic map is the scale of time. Since a turn is roughly equal to a month, a ship sliding into a planet's sector would have plenty of time to decelerate to orbital velocity before parking in orbit over the planet. Tactical combat, on the other hand, relies on what a ship can do in a span of a few minutes. This limit is expressed in movement points. If rotating takes no movement points, then it follows that it also takes no time, which means a ship rotates at approximately the speed of light, which means... I defer to Mr. Einstein.

There. I've run rings around your logic.

Now why do I have this feeling this is gonna cost me in a game somewhere...?

Quikngruvn

------------------
"That which does not kill you will make you stronger." -- Nietzsche

geoschmo · #6 July 11th, 2001, 08:48 PM

Ow Ow Ow, my aching head!

Spoo · #7 July 11th, 2001, 09:40 PM

[quote\ Certainty? Heisenberg would be spinning in his grave.... [/quote]

Don't you mean Heisenberg is simultaniously spinning in his grave and just lying there -until you check that is. Or maybe it was Shroeder's cat...

------------------
Assume you have a 1kg squirrel
E=mc^2
E=1kg(3x10^8m/s)^2=9x10^16J
which, if I'm not mistaken, is equivilent to roughly a 50 megaton nuclear bomb.
Fear the squirrel.