• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Citizen

About 420pussyblazer69

  • Rank
    New Member
  • Birthday 05/26/1997

Owned Augments / Technology

  • Augments N/A
  • Technology N/A


  • My Characters Edel Heller.

Recent Profile Visitors

45 profile views
  1. Report on R.Y.A.N for Godmoding, asspulling and metagaming.

    Okay. That had me laughing for a solid 10 minutes and made me want to just let it slide for the sheer stupidity that statement excludes. But, man. You can't just insert random technical mumbo jumbo like a Tachyonic Relay, FTL communication signal, electromagnetic communication internets and networks and then go up and say "much like how our internet is a wireless network of physically connected and small wireless networks." Before I say anything about this, I'd like to give you a link to this. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/cherenkov.html I think it's a very nice piece of read that you could make use of, simply because Cherenkov's radiation isn't something that is given off by anything that moves faster than light. If you were to do a single, simple google search like I have you would see that the phenomenon occurs when a charged molecule moves faster than light in a medium.  It is stated, repeatedly, as if trying to get it through the thick skull of all students that do scientific research, that this occurs when a charged molecule moves faster than light in a medium. To make my case more clear, this is the broadly generalized explanation of Cherenkov's Radiation. In the example of a water medium the charged particles excite the water molecules, and this causes the medium, which is water in this case, to produce a faint radiation. You can't generalize how Cherenkov's radiation works, it's a simple as 'horses eat hay'. This simply cannot exist in the vacuum of space due to the fact that the vacuum of space is in fact the absence of a medium. It is a vast void, devoid of particles that can be excited by the charged particles emitted by a nuclear reactor. Let us assume that the tachyon relays in your system use a nuclear reactor- that- sadly- that still doesn't factor in the cherenkov's radiation to any part of this. It's mere radiation. Space is full of it. Stars in every system pour so much of it that without protection we'd all know you'd have cancer. If, by any chance, you're suggesting that the light created by cherenkovs radiation while someone texts on an online texting service is enough to track someone through an entire galaxy, you're deadly wrong, because that would mean everyone would be carrying a nuclear reactor in their PDA's and they would glow brighter than a Novakid kicked to death by a mule. Now onto the tachyons shall we move on? Now, I love this subject. I meant hate. I absolutely hate tachyons, and I absolutely hate the way you described something that is so impossibly hard to precisely pinpoint on a grand scale as something so easy to track. I had given a proper, logical and very much sound explanation to the way a grand intranet (Not internet.)  system could work in my first post, and the admin overseeing this situation said that, would you look at that, I'm not wrong. Which speaks highly of their intelligence compared to someone who tosses in random words in a 5 paragraph text to make it seem legit or stray the reader from the actual point. HOWEVER, bantering aside, getting back to the topic of tachyons, I'll tell you what I meant when I said impossibly hard to pinpointly track. "We have found an effect related to the famous Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen phenomenon, in which two distantly separated photons can apparently influence one anothers' behaviors at two distantly separated detectors (see "High-Visibility Interference in a Bell-Inequality Experiment for Energy and Time," by P. G. Kwiat, A. M. Steinberg, and R. Y. Chiao, Physical Review A, Vol. 47, page R2472; 1993). This effect was first predicted theoretically by Prof. J. D. Franson of Johns Hopkins University. We have found experimentally that twin photons emitted from a common source (a down-conversion crystal) behave in a correlated fashion when they arrive at two distant interferometers. This phenomenon can be described as a 'faster-than-light influence' of one photon upon its twin. Because of the intrinsic randomness of quantum phenomena, however, one cannot control whether a given photon tunnels or not, nor can one control whether a given photon is transmitted or not at the final beam splitter. Hence it is impossible to send true signals in faster-than-light communications." Now, if that confuses you a bit I'll go ahead and drop another quote. "Because of the uncertainty principle, the photon has a small but very real chance of appearing suddenly on the far side of the barrier, through a quantum effect (the 'tunnel effect') which would seem impossible according to classical physics. The tunnel effect is so fast that it seems to occur faster than light." Both are from Tachyonlike Excitations in Inverted Two-Level Media' by R. Y. Chiao, A. E. Kozhekin, and G. Kurizki, Physical Review Letters, Vol. 77, page 1254; 1996, and references therein. And yes, I stole these two from ScientificAmerican, but they prove my point well enough. Something I once again got by a very simple google search. What it essentially means is that you don't think of the tachyons in a grand scale of things. For a system like you mention to be true, and since this is a sci-fi era, we'll say it is and assume that what I'm about to say is something do-able and is already being done, it means that for every letter that you send over the tachyons after mounting the information on them means it is being done repeatedly and repeatedly and repeatedly until the message is put across. Tachyons don't always move faster than light, the uncertainty principle has a small chance to occur, small but very possible. And with tachyons, reusable and basically everywhere, it means you have the resources to send them repeatedly. But, let's be honest here, at the very least 60% of the information you're sending is being repeated through tachyons. Maybe more. This means that tracking tachyons to find the person you want to seek is a lost cause. Your argument is very much invalid, I'm terribly sorry to say it, but I'm not going to keep my word to myself just because you are an admin. Why I'm saying this is that because tachyons are basically everywhere and all around us, with everyone texting on everywhere so relentlessly and with top notch memery, it's rather impossible to locate the ones you want, the few pins in the several planets worth of hay, and then rework their coding so that you can send them back to where they came from like a server ping, assuming they'll all get to where they did so you can track them.  The sad truth is that while the sender has a mass of tachyons he can send to make his point, you on the other hand have only a handful of clues to find where he is, and every time you try to find them your chances diminish, little by little. Tachyons, while convinient, aren't things with magical properties. It's just that highly advanced technology seems like magic until you begin to rationalize. That's why I'd like to direct your attention to my first post, which talked about how you might proceed to track someone in a more logical way by using the data mounted on the tachyons the servers receive instead of using the tachyons themselves. Feel free to reach me  @Roxvod on Discord if you have any problems with my reasoning here. 
  2. Report on R.Y.A.N for Godmoding, asspulling and metagaming.

    I'll go ahead and add this because people posted 2 lines of text just vouching without giving a proper reason, or looking for a logic behind the words said. When you see the word "probably" in an out of character conversation that regards an IC matter, please be mindful of the word's meaning. Most likely: presumably. Which doesn't mean it happened, so don't go around screaming "muh metagames", and have a shred of decency. Otherwise, let us pretend it did happen, and I hope it did happen, that brings me to my second subject on this matter. You're trying to tell me that military grade- let me reword myself- HUMAN top grade military equipment of a ship isn't tracking proof, or that it won't signal the user if someone, by some grand magic, even if it's nigh-impossible in the way you stated, tries to track them won't tell the user of a possible hacking attempt? Are you seriously doubting the paranoia of a human-made vessel, or did your special snowflake praying mantis blood stirred some shit in your thorax? @Nemo I know I'm being a bit over the top with the insults, sure, but the same goes for them. I'm just treating someone the say way they're treating other people.