Battles within the gas giant

[Omnivore]

In the example you quoted, the analogy would, of course, be to stand in an operating steel mill wearing IR goggles and expect to spot a match a kilometer away.

A lit match.

 

[McPerth]

About Fantasy vs Sci-fi:

To my understanding, both of them are developing human dreams (or nightmares), but while fantasy is about unbelievable ways (talking and humanly acting animals, genees that fulfill wishes, etc), Sci-fi is abou what is unattainable with current tech, but believable (to a point) with future (either near or far) tech developement.

Jules Verne used few of Hans' points for Sci-fi, but even so I guess can be said as being it.

 

[McPerth]

About the sensors issue:

I guess for each maesure there will be a counter-measure devloped (or at least efforts toward it). I understand we cannot now envivion how to counteract the densiomentes, for what some of you told me about them, but I guess many efforts would have done at TL15 to counteract them.

I don't know if gravitics might be so used, but, as densiometers are described (at least in MT:RM page 87):

A densiometer detects an object's gravity and by doing so can locateand classify the object according that paticular object's density type

I believe they should be able to, perhaps not in space (where other sensors as infrared will tell you eactly where to look at and focus your efforts, and no gravity to match exists), but in a GG atmosphere it would be another matter.

In the same way as now there have been developed ways to fool radars, I still believe that by those TLs there would have been developed ways to fool densiometers (perhaps not in space, as told).

Maybe just wishful thinking jus to keep things interesting for the refueling fleet and to give the defender a chance (or to match with the various canon references to SDBs lurking deep in GGs).

 

[mike wightman]

When SDBs were first described as being able to hide in oceans and gas giants the densitometer hadn't been conceived.

Starter question, when was the densitometer first introduced into Traveller canon.

Follow up question, were all of the ramifications of its introduction considered before it was made canonical?

And final question, why not just say the densitometer, neutrino sensor etc. are not IYTU?

 

[mike wightman]

Another loophole for use IYTU.

The artificial gravity and acceleration compensation fields produced by Traveller magi-tech are not the same as 'real' gravity. If they were then your 1g floor field has the same inertial mass as the planet Earth

So just say the densitometer only detects gravity due to mass, not due to artificial gravity fields. You could go further and say that the artificial gravity field can be adjusted to provide stealth vs densitometers.

 

[McPerth]

When SDBs were first described as being able to hide in oceans and gas giants the densitometer hadn't been conceived.

I guess you're right here, but even afte it was, SDB kept lurking theree. About bottom sea lurking,i can be argued that they have a penetration limit, about GG atmosphere, not so sure...

Starter question, when was the densitometer first introduced into Traveller canon.

AFAIK in MT. At least for space combat.

Follow up question, were all of the ramifications of its introduction considered before it was made canonical?

I guess not.

And final question, why not just say the densitometer, neutrino sensor etc. are not IYTU?

Because I agree those sensos are nice, just don'believe them infalible. Neutrino, as an example, should (IMHO) be temporary binded (perhaps less than one space combat turn, and so irrelevant) with nuclear explosions, as sonar was in WWII (I don't know about today) by deph charges.

Another loophole for use IYTU.

The artificial gravity and acceleration compensation fields produced by Traveller magi-tech are not the same as 'real' gravity. If they were then your 1g floor field has the same inertial mass as the planet Earth

So just say the densitometer only detects gravity due to mass, not due to artificial gravity fields. You could go further and say that the artificial gravity field can be adjusted to provide stealth vs densitometers.

Again IMHO, that would be as saying that artificial light is different than natural light (e.g. sunlight), so natural light won't interfere in detecting artificial one.

Same with sound and sonars, etc...

 

[rancke]

Jules Verne used few of Hans' points for Sci-fi, but even so I guess can be said as being it.

One is all it takes (Ignoring the various problems with grey areas and ambiguities). Some of Jules Verne's books were Science Fiction, some weren't. But none of them were Fantasy. And then there were a couple that might arguably be sort of the equivalent of techno-thrillers (Five Weeks in a Balloon, Le maison à vapeur (Don't know the English title)).


Hans

 

[McPerth]

It is to note from Jules Verne that in his novel Robur the Conqueror Robur puts black flags with gold suns in several world monuments. Was he an imperial agent :devil:?

(Don't know the English title)).

When that happens to me, I search it in wikipedia by its name in Spanish (or Catalan) and when I have the article I click to the English button.

 

[HG_B]

In the example you quoted, the analogy would, of course, be to stand in an operating steel mill wearing IR goggles and expect to spot a match a kilometer away.

A lit match.

Or, to be looking at the sun with IR camera and detect a lit match between the IR camera and the sun? They can do that now with filters.

So, like I said in my post before this...

 

[atpollard]

In the example you quoted, the analogy would, of course, be to stand in an operating steel mill wearing IR goggles and expect to spot a [lit] match a kilometer away.

Or, to be looking at the sun with IR camera and detect a lit match between the IR camera and the sun? They can do that now with filters.

Just for my personal clarification:

@ Omnivore
Are you arguing that nothing can be done to mitigate background 'noise'?

@ HG_B
Are you arguing that background 'noise' will have absolutely no impact?

From your other comments, I suspect that you are each making a point, but not in such absolute terms as the rhetoric might suggest.

 

[Omnivore]

Not interested in contributing to this board.

 

[Omnivore]

It isn't Fantasy vs Sci-fi.. at least not in the strict definition of the terms. Sci-Fi is a type of fantasy. Han's used Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit as a reference.

Wikipedia is not a definitive source, nor all that reliable when you are seeking accuracy.I used fantasy in its role as a synonym for fiction, all science fiction is, in strict definition, a form of literary fantasy.

I guess I hit on a raw nerve by 'accusing' Traveller as being fantasy.

 

[rancke]

It isn't Fantasy vs Sci-fi.. at least not in the strict definition of the terms. Sci-Fi is a type of fantasy. Han's used Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit as a reference.

Anyone that provides extensive documentation for what they write, yes. Why should I bother collating evidence form 125 different sources when someone else has already done so?

Wikipedia is not a definitive source, nor all that reliable when you are seeking accuracy.

It's good enough for me as long as all the evidence you provide is your own say-so. Until and unless you provide contrary evidence of the same level of accuracy, I see no reason to go any further into details than the article itself.

I used fantasy in its role as a synonym for fiction, all science fiction is, in strict definition, a form of literary fantasy.

I've already dealt with that. By that definition every piece of fiction is fantasy. If that was what you mean, why not just say 'fiction'? Using 'fantasy' just obscures your message.

I guess I hit on a raw nerve by 'accusing' Traveller as being fantasy.

That's quite true. I've been involved in a discussion on the SJG boards with someone who argued that any failure of realism means that it's not SF but Fantasy. I dropped out of it because I didn't see any prospect of convincing anybody else of anything nor of learning something new myself.


Hans

 

[Omnivore]

And all of this, including your poorly written, inaccurate, argumentative reply to my original post has anything whatsoever to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[rancke]

And all of this, including your poorly written, inaccurate, argumentative reply to my original post has anything whatsoever to do with the topic of this thread?

I'm quite comfortable with my ability to write English, everything I wrote was accurate except whatever confusion your poorly written original post had induced in me, and argue is what you do in arguments.

We don't take topic drift as seriously here on CotI as they do on some other forums. It has to do with a topic that arose naturally in the thread and is related to Traveller (in this case the nature of Traveller and of Science Fiction) and in response to an apparently fallacious argument you had posted.

From Wikipedia: In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[3] The noun troll may also refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted."

You really want to go there? Very well:

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.[1] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[2][3][4] more precisely an irrelevance.[5]

If anyone else thought I was trolling, let me know, and I'll care enough to deny it.


Hans

 

[HG_B]

@ HG_B
Are you arguing that background 'noise' will have absolutely no impact?

No, I'm saying that it can be mitigated. We ALREADY do so for gravimetric readings at TL 7. So, are you saying that this technology will devolve as TL increases?

 

[McPerth]

No, I'm saying that it can be mitigated. We ALREADY do so for gravimetric readings at TL 7. So, are you saying that this technology will devolve as TL increases?

For my part, I don't believe that any technology will devolve as TL increases (though some may fell in desuse and even be nearly forgotten, but that's not the matter now). What I believe is that countermesures to blend your own ship to the background (be it neutrinos, gravity, etc, and as long s there is background to blend with, not in space) will also be developed.

In the case of neutrinos, it may be to focus them into one direction (not too useful in space, but if you send most of them to the GG, the remaining ones might as well be blended to the GG own emissions), in the case of gravity maybe the interference with it that gravitics produce may downgrade densiometers, and sure otehr ways I cannot even imagine today, as I cannot imagine many more high TL...

 

[Omnivore]

No, I'm saying that it can be mitigated. We ALREADY do so for gravimetric readings at TL 7. So, are you saying that this technology will devolve as TL increases?

Devolve? No, certainly not. However... we don't have gravitics at TL 7.

What happens when you place a gravimetric sensor inside a ship that has grav plates/thrusters? A fusion reactor (that most likely uses gravitics to achieve pp fusion), lasers that have (according to FF&S II iirc) gravitic lenses? Part of a fleet that includes many other ships using a variety of gravitics based tech?

In other words, not less mitigation, but far more noise. Maybe. That's part of the problem. We don't know. What is gravitics? How does it behave?

 

[Cryton]

Originally Posted by HG_B
No, I'm saying that it can be mitigated. We ALREADY do so for gravimetric readings at TL 7. So, are you saying that this technology will devolve as TL increases?

Devolve? No, certainly not. However... we don't have gravitics at TL 7.

What happens when you place a gravimetric sensor inside a ship that has grav plates/thrusters? A fusion reactor (that most likely uses gravitics to achieve pp fusion), lasers that have (according to FF&S II iirc) gravitic lenses? Part of a fleet that includes many other ships using a variety of gravitics based tech?

In other words, not less mitigation, but far more noise. Maybe. That's part of the problem. We don't know. What is gravitics? How does it behave?

He didn't say we had Gravitics at TL7, he said we We ALREADY do so for gravimetric readings at TL 7 (mitigate for background "noise"). Huge difference.

Meaning, any artificial gravitic noise would be filtered out.

 

[Greylond]

What happens when you place a gravimetric sensor inside a ship that has grav plates/thrusters? A fusion reactor (that most likely uses gravitics to achieve pp fusion), lasers that have (according to FF&S II iirc) gravitic lenses? Part of a fleet that includes many other ships using a variety of gravitics based tech?

I doubt that the actual sensor would be inside of a ship but mounted on the hull if not on some kind of mount holding it away from the hull. For example modern warships have their primary RADAR mounted high above the hull and most other interference.