Omniverse One

Ok, this is about the laser issue: I seen videos of people making burning lasers out of simple diodes, from mass-produced DVD players. I don't see why it isn't possible for a bit more lethal laser weapon in the setting. What is the problem with that? Is it that it has something to do with distance, or how much power is needed for a more lethal laser?

There isn't a problem with it technically. The potential problem is if it would outcompete the alternatives. I doubt a laser infantry gun would be better than a regular gun, though it is possible to build one. The laser would be more easily damaged and more expensive, etc.

Lasers on spacecraft however have several advantages over guns - the big one being that the beam travels faster, which is important given the huge size of space. Will they outcompete missiles? Depends on your individual polity's tech and the mission the ship is on.

Concerning the "laser issue": I think it bears repeating that the best way to design an army, and by extension the military vehicles and personal side-arms it's made up of, is to formulate a mission statement first, and then conceiving the kinds of vehicles you'd need to successfully complete that mission.

For example, if the job of your futuristic marine corps is to take and hold heavily fortified planets, they might need orbital artillery to soften up the enemy, big and survivable landers to land lots of troops simultaneously and heavy armor to pummel troops and fortifications. The end result might roughly resemble an army of Bolo's backed up by Mobile Infantry.

If on the other hand the corps is a federal quick reaction force intended primarily to squash colonial conflict between rival groups of lightly armed fringe world yokels, they might look rather more like the USCM from Aliens.

Depending on how you formulate the mission statement of your army, they might or might not need personal laser weapons. If they're concerned about pin-point accuracy lasers would be pretty sweet and the obvious drawbacks could be taken for granted. If on the other hand they're more of a brute force group they might very well ditch lasers and go straight for rail guns, rocket launchers, whatever. Each has its own pros and cons.

Basically you shouldn't be concerned about whether your military HAS lasers, but whether it NEEDS them. What does it intend to do, and are lasers the best tool for the job? If the answer is 'no', then use something else.

Both technologies (Laser weapons and Slugthrowers of some kind) have distinct advantages and disadvantages to them.

Unlike a coilgun, for instance, a laser does not ever truly run out of ammo. It's battery may deplete, but as long as the people using it have access to at least one working generator, they're pretty much set. Soldiers using coilguns need a supply of ammo AND a working generator to continue firing.

Unlike a laser, however, coilguns are capable of indirect fire. Laser artillery is impossible. Sure, you could have some kind of 'flying mirror' to redirect laser fire over obstacles, but you'd need to make these mirrors out of a material capable of withstanding the laser and if you can do that, the enemy can make armour out of the same material and render your laser weapons completely useless.

Slugthrowers have the important psychological advantage that a number of bullet impacts near a soldier's position will make them take cover, giving slugthrowers the ability to lay down suppressive fire.
Lasers have the important psychological advantage that the effect of invisible and untraceable fire coming his way will make a soldier take cover, giving lasers the ability to lay down suppressive fire too.
The difference between them is that Slugthrowers will make soldiers take cover behind something shielding them to maximum possible effect on the side the bullets are coming from, while a laser will make soldiers take cover somewhere that gives them maximum cover on all sides.

Lasers are better at long range, slugthrowers are more efficient in close combat.

Lasers are pinpoint, so hitting a soldier will certainly give them a small hole.
Slugthrowers use less accurate bullets, so hitting a soldier will potentially tear them to shreds (or simply graze them).

Lasers are delicate and expensive to make/maintain, but never jam or misfire. A laser weapon either fires or it doesn't (a laser with a damaged lens will not fire in the wrong direction, it will simply discharge an ineffective beam of unfocused light).
Slughtrowers are more robust and easier to maintain, but they can jam, misfire and when damage my fire erratically and endanger the user or those around him.

Etc.. Etc..

Similar differences apply to spaceships.

Lasers hit near instantly and do not noticeably affect the trajectory of the ship firing them, but produce massive amounts of heat if fired for long periods of time, but cannot hit anything that no direct line of sight is established to.

Slughthrowers will not produce as much heat and they can use planetary gravity to more or less shoot 'around the corner' if not that much, they can also carry payloads that can affect areas, but they are much easier to avoid and have a much more significant impact on the trajectory of the ship firing them.

(Missiles have much shorter range than both of the above and take a lot more resources and space to deploy, but are capable of tracking targets and adjusting course, can hit targets on the other side of interfering objects and do not affect the trajectory of the ship deploying them at all).

So as Siege said, the issue of lasers vs. coilguns depends on the conditions, mindset etc. of who ever's fighting (on both sides).

Missiles can potentially have the longest range of the lot exactly because they are capable of tracking targets. They can launch and coast their way to the target, then light up their engines and follow him for the kill after crossing a long gap.

Of course, extending their fuel supply might be fairly expensive, which will put a limit on how far they can chase you and how long it will take them to cross that gap.

So how many races can we have?

As many as you can keep track of, far as I'm concerned.

UR-EEEE-KA~

What happens when you are too big to fit in a graveddie? Simple - you pass right through it, temporarily appearing to partially be on both sides at once. If you are a ship. the people inside you would never notice.

This might seem weird; it looks like your ship partially dematerialized from the outside, but the ship is still quite intact. It is just a bizarre illusion.

Has it actually been established how large graveddies can get?

No, I don't think so. I've been assuming small moon size, but we haven't put a max or a min size on it.

The 'you notice nothing' when inside is slightly more complicated than an optical illusion. Unless, the two graveddies are on a completely parallel orbits, the two parts of the ship are moving at vastly different speeds and vectors.

However, just like playing catch in a moving train, all motions inside the vehicle happen at the same relative speeds.

This means that if you throw a ball from one section of a ship in a graveddie to the other section, the ball may, to outside observers, turn 45 degrees to the left and 30 degrees downwards and double in speed, but to the passengers of the vessel it'll fly like a regular ball.

At least that's how it must work for graveddies since ships can pass through it unharmed
In reality, of course, that's not possible, since the stress imparted on an object from a sudden change in vector and speed would tear most vessels apart (people too, although we're probably resilient enough to survive going through such a 'hole in space' and adjust to the speed/vector change if we go through it relatively quickly. Sticking your hand into it's event horizon so that half your arm is on one side and the other half is on the other for more than a split second is a good way to break and/or lose it, though.

How plausible would it be to harvest energy from a nebula?

Pretty pointless - nebulae are not very dense (the only reason they are visible at all is their size), so trying to mine the gas would be pretty futile. Any baby star in it would be putting out just plain old solar power at best.

I know this hasn't been touched for quite a while, but I want to try to expand on this universe, and was wondering if there are links that is basically Science 101, where I can learn basic principles and such without bothering you guys eternally.

Do you mean real science or just the special science from the 'verse?

The big important thing for the 'verse is the graveddie, which is basically a wormhole between a star and a hub system. Some are direct connects, but most, when mapped, look like spokes on a wheel. Travel through them is instant, and you can see through them. No special stardrive is needed to pass through one.

(Basically, they are a way to get connected to the action at the speed of plot, with bonus strategic chokepoints + trade hubs in the middle.)


For real science, pretty much just remember that a) something can't come from nothing and b) space is pretty big, and you'll probably be OK; this isn't a super hard sf 'verse, so you can take a few liberties. However, obvious soft sci fi stuff is out - no energy shields, no FTL except for the graveddies, stuff like that.

Just focus on writing something that's cool.

edit: If you do have more specific questions, certainly feel free to ask too. I don't mind answering them.

Alright, thanks for the help. Another question I have is I was wondering, and this isn't concerning TSW specifically, what would happen if a sun's energy was being sapped? How would a energyless sun die?

How do you mean sapped?

If you somehow managed to whisk energy away from the centre of a sun or at least the layers of the sun that are actively fusing and creating energy (not necessarily at the exact centre in later stages of a star's life)

Well; anyhoo, the sun's reallying on that radiation pressure to keep itself from collapsing. Sap the energy, the star collapses to a smaller volume until enough new fusion is generate to sustain it. If you sap all the energy coming out even as it cllpasing it's going to keep shrinking until its supported only by electron (or later neutron) degeneracy pressure. (where the fermi exclusion principle means they electrons can't get any closer to each other due to have the same quantum state)

Remember that sapping a sun's energy doesn't need to be anything magical or harmful: it could just be solar collectors in orbit. This is probably the easiest way to do it too; you don't have to run your own outside reactors or super complicated collection system.

Even a magical method probably wouldn't do harm to the star, since the star is so huge. You can sap a huge amount of energy from it without it 'noticing' anything wrong.


Now, if you did somehow suck down enough to cause a problem, I'd imagine it would be like premature aging of the star. What Booted Vulture said seems to make sense. (I'm no astrophysicist though, so of course, I'm not sure.)

Yeah, sapping as in taking the raw energy of the sun and using it. It's a good way to gain lots and lots of energy to do lots of whacked up stuff needing lots of mind-boggling energy, while also depriving the system of a sun, maybe because the system houses a few of your enemies.

Now, I know I won't be possibly using such ideas in TSW and more into my Traveler carbon copy story, but it's good to put that out there just in case we need to put a line on it if someone wants to use that concept to wave off insane soft sci fi things like shielding.

I'm seeing quite a bit of the United Nations in the universe. Do they play a part in TSW?

To be honest I don't think we ever really formulated much of an opinion about that... Arty may have had thoughts on the UN issue, but he's kind of, uh, vanished .

While I'm not sure on how the UN is involved in 'modern' TSW, the UN of the past did play a heavy role in the formation of several of the polities you see. Going on what Arty has mentioned, I postulated that they treated their colonies like absolute shit. Unfair tarrifs, little to no representation on Earth, and economic exploitation were just some of the things I and others have mentioned. Beyond that, I never firmed up much on their fate since the 'verse kinda died on us. I did mention at least once, though, that the UN did recover and got into a scuffle with the Federal Republic of Olympus, but, beyond that, not much has been established.

What is the usual time for graveddies to open and close? Is there a span of time that people from colonies have to wait until they can receive homeplanet aid? And are these "trade winds" mappable for space captains to find out which eddie might possibly open and close?

My impression was that it's very much a case by case thing. Some graveddies are pretty much stable, some switch their connections, some sort of turn themselves off and then (if you're lucky) on again. Incidentally I imagine when a graveddy is 'offline' it will be pretty much undetectable since no light will be falling through it, unless it's somehow detectable by... graviton radar or some such.

Does anyone have any idea exactly how far the Human Diaspora has spread and what kind of population it boasts?
I've just been looking through some of these old threads (I was about to post a new nation but I've lost my USB stick which has the document) and this question just struck me, since there are a relatively large number of human colonies, some of which, like Starkland and America in Space (Yeah!) have pretty high populations. I mean each of those have about 50 systems to their name, so if there were 10 of them in total they would exceed the core territory of the Souzu-gu Illuminate (but without the political unity or gigantic battlemoons). It also occurred to me that the argument early in the question thread over what the size limit was was never really settled.