Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Lars Ericson <lericson@****.EDU>
Subject: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 13:49:00 -0500
Wilbur The new adept wrote:
>
> >
> >Yup, 200nm is IR. Also, there is a minimum resolution distance that can
> >be resolved by optical means. The standard limit used is called
> >Rayleigh's Criterion and for visible light with a 20 mm focal length
> >(short, but typical) it is 6.7 microns or roughly 7 thousands of a
> >millimeter. There is no way with optical focal lenses that 200nm could
> >be resolved. I've been able to see 1 micron with our instruments, but
> it
> >is tough and damn small.
> aha! but all the maGE needs is to get specially made the electronn
> microscopey thingy and what it in his head Tada! its able to be used
> with magic YAY!....now someone who knows what their talking about can
> suggest how this could be integrated into a cybereye .........hint hint.
> MRhaPPYTHeSMilEYmaN

That sounds like a very interesting field of 2060 modern theoretical
magical research. I hadn't considered that. The level of cybernetics is
going to be rather detailed for imaging resolution on the sub-micron
level. You're talking about Scanning Electron Microscopy level of
computer and aparatus. Probably will be rather prohibitive to have the
level of imaging needed.
I can see it now, a side mounted vacuum chamber into which a sample is
mounted and then the chamber is vented. All kinds of tubes and wires
running to a nitrogen tank on your belt. Then internally there'd be the
an electron gun and the imaging software.
All of this is null since there is no known way to magnify an aura.
Which brings up a good question:


Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
magnification see someone's aura?



--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond
Smalley Research Group, Rice University
E-Mail: lericson@****.edu
WWW: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lericson/

"Raisin Hell -- a million raisins in every can."
-- Sifl & Olly Show
Message no. 2
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 15:11:59 -0400
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Lars Ericson wrote:

<snip electomanetronic eyes or whatever>
->> MRhaPPYTHeSMilEYmaN
->
-> That sounds like a very interesting field of 2060 modern theoretical
->magical research. I hadn't considered that. The level of cybernetics is
->going to be rather detailed for imaging resolution on the sub-micron
->level. You're talking about Scanning Electron Microscopy level of
->computer and aparatus. Probably will be rather prohibitive to have the
->level of imaging needed.
-> I can see it now, a side mounted vacuum chamber into which a sample is
->mounted and then the chamber is vented. All kinds of tubes and wires
->running to a nitrogen tank on your belt. Then internally there'd be the
->an electron gun and the imaging software.
-> All of this is null since there is no known way to magnify an aura.
->Which brings up a good question:
->
->
->Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
->magnification see someone's aura?

No. The image can be seen normally but since the magnification is
electronic, and electronic devices cannot discern an aura, the aura is not
magnified. This is also why a magician with camera eyes cannot take
pictures of someone's aura, the image doesn't take to electronic
recording (besides the fact that the magician isn't actually 'seeing' the
aura, s/he's 'feeling' the aura and interpreting it visually.
For more reference, see pg. 171 under "Astral Perception". "Known
as 'The Sight' among the Awakened, astral perception does not rely on
physical vision in any way; it is a psychic sense."
Actaully, reading it this way, no form of visual magnification
assists in astral perception, even binoculars..... uh oh..... At least on
pg. 288 of the BBB3 it says "Binoculars: These flat, compact digital
imagers produce resolution at up to 50x magnification. Optical Glass
variants are available for magicians..." So I guess that's a grey area
that MiTS will hopefully clear up.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 3
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 15:11:44 -0400
David Foster wrote:
> ->Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
> ->magnification see someone's aura?
>
> No. The image can be seen normally but since the magnification is
> electronic, and electronic devices cannot discern an aura, the aura is not
> magnified. This is also why a magician with camera eyes cannot take
> pictures of someone's aura, the image doesn't take to electronic
> recording (besides the fact that the magician isn't actually 'seeing' the
> aura, s/he's 'feeling' the aura and interpreting it visually.
>
I disagree with that - SR3, p300 states that magicians need the optical
vision magnification as opposed to the electronic. This implies that
there's some sort of visual requirement (at least in physical space).

> For more reference, see pg. 171 under "Astral Perception".
"Known
> as 'The Sight' among the Awakened, astral perception does not rely on
> physical vision in any way; it is a psychic sense."
>
Auras are astral, aren't they? Hmmm...

> Actaully, reading it this way, no form of visual magnification
> assists in astral perception, even binoculars..... uh oh..... At least on
> pg. 288 of the BBB3 it says "Binoculars: These flat, compact digital
> imagers produce resolution at up to 50x magnification. Optical Glass
> variants are available for magicians..." So I guess that's a grey area
> that MiTS will hopefully clear up.
>
I think that was meant for the typical casting of spells at range - do
mages need to perceive to cast spells? The previous Pseduo-Scientific
Babble was that the mage needed to synchronize auras - how things work
now, we'll have to wait for MiTS to find out...

James Ojaste
Message no. 4
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 15:56:10 -0400
At 03:11 PM 9/11/98 -0400, you wrote:

>I disagree with that - SR3, p300 states that magicians need the optical
>vision magnification as opposed to the electronic. This implies that
>there's some sort of visual requirement (at least in physical space).

Yes, for Line Of Sight. There is no implication however that a mundane
magnification device (binoculars) would change how the astral plane is
viewed however.

>I think that was meant for the typical casting of spells at range - do
>mages need to perceive to cast spells? The previous Pseduo-Scientific
>Babble was that the mage needed to synchronize auras - how things work
>now, we'll have to wait for MiTS to find out...

No, it's right in BBB3. Line of Sight is required to target, but astral
perception or aural synchronization is not.

Erik J.

Feeling a bit of attitude returning!
Message no. 5
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:09:47 -0400
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Erik Jameson wrote:

<snip>
->>I think that was meant for the typical casting of spells at range - do
->>mages need to perceive to cast spells? The previous Pseduo-Scientific
->>Babble was that the mage needed to synchronize auras - how things work
->>now, we'll have to wait for MiTS to find out...
->
->No, it's right in BBB3. Line of Sight is required to target, but astral
->perception or aural synchronization is not.

Actually, aural synchronization is needed but, since you can see
the target, is obtained subconsciously. And, of course, this only applies
to combat spells, as manipulation spells simply home in on their target in
the real (Shadowrun) world.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 6
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 14:05:21 -0600
Erik Jameson wrote:
/
/ At 03:11 PM 9/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
/
/ >I disagree with that - SR3, p300 states that magicians need the optical
/ >vision magnification as opposed to the electronic. This implies that
/ >there's some sort of visual requirement (at least in physical space).
/
/ Yes, for Line Of Sight.

Specifically, for spellcasting. Spellcasting is not astrally
percieving.

/ There is no implication however that a mundane
/ magnification device (binoculars) would change how the astral plane is
/ viewed however.

Sure there is. The statement that astral perception is not visual, but
psychic addresses it. Binoculars and such are visual enhancements, not
psychic enhancements. Therefor mundane vision enhancements have do
*not* change how the astral plane is viewed.

/ >I think that was meant for the typical casting of spells at range - do
/ >mages need to perceive to cast spells? The previous Pseduo-Scientific
/ >Babble was that the mage needed to synchronize auras - how things work
/ >now, we'll have to wait for MiTS to find out...
/
/ No, it's right in BBB3. Line of Sight is required to target, but astral
/ perception or aural synchronization is not.

Agreed.

/ Feeling a bit of attitude returning!

<chuckles and takes a half step back>

-David
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 7
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 21:22:38 +0100
And verily, did Lars Ericson hastily scribble thusly...
|Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
|magnification see someone's aura?

If he's prepared to have a room sized machine grafted into his eye socket, I
see no reason why not. (Hey, he's payed the essense for it, but he's not
moving anywhere again, ever...)

<EGMG>

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 8
From: Shaun Gilroy <shaung@**********.NET>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:22:56 -0400
At 03:56 PM 9/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
>At 03:11 PM 9/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>I disagree with that - SR3, p300 states that magicians need the optical
>>vision magnification as opposed to the electronic. This implies that
>>there's some sort of visual requirement (at least in physical space).
>
>Yes, for Line Of Sight. There is no implication however that a mundane
>magnification device (binoculars) would change how the astral plane is
>viewed however.

Look at it this way;

When in astral form/percieving, you have no trouble seeing that guy
across the open field from you (not accounting for trees and other physical
obstructions). You can blast an astral form from quite a distance away, no
problems. That's a psychic entity noticing other psychic entities.

However, your mundane little eyes can't see anything way down there on the
aforementioned distant end of the field. Distance is a whole lot more
trivial in astral space than it is in the physical world. However, pick up
a pair of Binoculars and you can just pick him out, and can therefore blast
him.



(>)noysh the spoonë bard
-> jack of all trades, master of none. <-
Message no. 9
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 16:35:18 -0400
At 02:05 PM 9/11/98 -0600, you wrote:

>/ There is no implication however that a mundane
>/ magnification device (binoculars) would change how the astral plane is
>/ viewed however.
>
>Sure there is. The statement that astral perception is not visual, but
>psychic addresses it. Binoculars and such are visual enhancements, not
>psychic enhancements. Therefor mundane vision enhancements have do
>*not* change how the astral plane is viewed.

I thought that was what I said. I guess I was fuzzy on that perhaps.

>/ Feeling a bit of attitude returning!
>
><chuckles and takes a half step back>

Oh, do behave! ;-)

Erik J.


http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World
Message no. 10
From: Dom T-J <phobic@**.NET.AU>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 12:11:28 +1000
>Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
>magnification see someone's aura?
>Lars Ericson: Professional Vagabond

You aren't using your eyes when you astrally perceive. (Ref: Sam in
"Never Deal With a Dragon". He closes his eyes and lets his head slump,
then "looks up" astrally.) Thus I don't think that any kinds of vision
enhancment apply to this situation.

Later-

Phobic
"He who fears nothing save fear itself. And trolls with clubs."
Message no. 11
From: Tarek Okail <Tarek_Okail@**********.COM>
Subject: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 03:44:46 -0400
Lars--

>Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
>magnification see someone's aura?

Yes. Contrary to Fixer's opinion, the mage can percieve
the aura of someone quite far away using electronic vision mag.
cyberimplantation. However, the magician will not be able to
see that aura very well, because the aura will not be magnified
by the electronic vision magnification. Put a telescope up to
one eye, and focus both eyes on a distant object. You'll be able
to see the object in a great deal of detail through the scope,
but you won't be able to see it very well with the other eye.
That's what percieving auras is like with electronic mag.
cyberimplants. It's sufficient to cast spells with, but it's not
recommended if you need to do psychometry.

Shadowmage
Message no. 12
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 11:41:56 +0200
According to Dom T-J, at 12:11 on 12 Sep 98, the word on the street was...

> You aren't using your eyes when you astrally perceive. (Ref: Sam in
> "Never Deal With a Dragon". He closes his eyes and lets his head slump,
> then "looks up" astrally.) Thus I don't think that any kinds of vision
> enhancment apply to this situation.

"Astral perception does not rely on physical vision in any way; it is a
psychic sense." (SR3, p. 171.) I also recall reading a bit of text that
mentioned that with astral perception, your eyes don't roll back in your
head, you don't get a weird look in your eyes, or anything like that, but
I can't remember where it sais that. Awakenings maybe, but I don't feel
like looking it up right now.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
It may look to the untrained eye I'm sitting on my arse all day.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 13
From: David Foster <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1998 10:50:45 -0400
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Tarek Okail wrote:

->Lars--
->
->>Q: Can a magician astrally perceiving with electronic vision
->>magnification see someone's aura?
->
-> Yes. Contrary to Fixer's opinion, the mage can percieve
->the aura of someone quite far away using electronic vision mag.
->cyberimplantation. However, the magician will not be able to
->see that aura very well, because the aura will not be magnified
->by the electronic vision magnification. Put a telescope up to
->one eye, and focus both eyes on a distant object. You'll be able
->to see the object in a great deal of detail through the scope,
->but you won't be able to see it very well with the other eye.
->That's what percieving auras is like with electronic mag.
->cyberimplants. It's sufficient to cast spells with, but it's not
->recommended if you need to do psychometry.
->
->Shadowmage

Well, I was trying to refer to the fact that there will still be
modifiers on the spell's TN due to range, and electronic magnification
will not assist in reducing these (although the optical would). I
misspoke myself.

Fixer --------------} The easy I do before breakfast,
the difficult I do all day long,
the impossible only during the week,
and miracles performed on an as-needed basis....

Now tell me, what was your problem?
Message no. 14
From: Tarek Okail <Tarek_Okail@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 01:07:03 -0400
Fixer--

>Well, I was trying to refer to the fact that there will still
>be modifiers on the spell's TN due to range, and electronic
>magnification will not assist in reducing these (although the
>optical would). I misspoke myself.

Oh, I see. Well, I also forgot something... the grin.
I thought that was something like what you meant, but that's not
what you posted. <g>

Shadowmage

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Electronics & Astral Perception (Was Re: primium Plating), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!