Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:56:30 -0700
For the mere cost of a Thaum, Adam Getchell wrote:
/
/ Physically speaking, anything that can manipulate gravity must be able to
/ manipulate energy on an enormous scale, like several solar masses worth.
/ The simplest explanation is this: to produce a one-gee gravitational field
/ of the same size and distributions as the earth's would require assembling
/ the energy-equivalence of the earth's mass. Since the Earth is about 6.6
/ sectillion tons ( ~ 6 x 10E24 kg) you are talking 5.4 x 10E41 joules, which
/ is a fair fraction of the Sun's total energy output over its 10 billion
/ year lifespan.

<Q> Unless you change the constant of gravity, of course. </Q>

;)

-David Buehrer
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 2
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 02:08:37 EST
In a message dated 10/26/1998 3:56:39 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:

>
> / Physically speaking, anything that can manipulate gravity must be able to
> / manipulate energy on an enormous scale, like several solar masses worth.
> / The simplest explanation is this: to produce a one-gee gravitational
field
> / of the same size and distributions as the earth's would require
assembling
> / the energy-equivalence of the earth's mass. Since the Earth is about 6.6
> / sectillion tons ( ~ 6 x 10E24 kg) you are talking 5.4 x 10E41 joules,
> which
> / is a fair fraction of the Sun's total energy output over its 10 billion
> / year lifespan.
>
> <Q> Unless you change the constant of gravity, of course. </Q>
>
Gravitic Manipulation is something that I've wondered around a bit with in
Shadowrun, but have not had -anyone- tamper with spells of this kind since
First Edition (a while ago, yes... ;). Anyway, what would the relative
levels of gravity be able to perform, and what would variable gravity
increases/decreases incur as far as penalty numbers???

Yes, this is a very serious question.

-K
Message no. 3
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 17:22:12 +1000
K writes:
> Gravitic Manipulation is something that I've wondered around a bit with in
> Shadowrun, but have not had -anyone- tamper with spells of this kind since
> First Edition (a while ago, yes... ;). Anyway, what would the relative
> levels of gravity be able to perform, and what would variable gravity
> increases/decreases incur as far as penalty numbers???

a) One thing you'd want to look at is the ability to focus gravity. Gravity
has an effect on electromagnetic fields, presumably electromagnetic fields
can have an effect on gravity. Certainly, gravity lenses are a fairly common
sci-fi device (though not in the near-future sci-fi like Shadowrun,
admittedly). You get an area of low gravity, balanced out by an area of high
gravity.

b) High-gravity increases your load. Easy answer would be to increase the
total weight of the person and gear, and make that their load for terms of
carrying stuff, I guess.

c) Low-gravity throws out all your reflexes (so does high-gravity, but the
extra weight is a bigger problem). You could expect a serious target number
penalty for any sort of physical action that requires co-ordination, e.g
combat, athletics, etc. I'd expect you've already got low-grav rules
somewhere: you've done those runs in space, as I recall. Failing that,
Cyberpunk has a fairly decent space sourcebook.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 4
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:47:00 -0700
For the mere cost of a Thaum, K in the Shadows wrote:
/
/ Gravitic Manipulation is something that I've wondered around a bit with in
/ Shadowrun, but have not had -anyone- tamper with spells of this kind since
/ First Edition (a while ago, yes... ;). Anyway, what would the relative
/ levels of gravity be able to perform, and what would variable gravity
/ increases/decreases incur as far as penalty numbers???
/
/ Yes, this is a very serious question.

In addition to the issues Robert addressed, there's a few other affects
you can get from changing the direction and strength of gravity.

There's the standard increase and decrease.

Change the direction to toss someone sideways, or walk on a wall
(images of David Bowe in the Escher section of "Labyrinth" come to mind
:)

It would take one hell of a spell, but you could (theoretically) twist
gravity to such an extent that opposing shear lines would cause damage.

And imagine this <EGMG>: a gravity tornado.

Just some thoughts.

-David Buehrer
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 5
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:29:03 -0800
>Gravitic Manipulation is something that I've wondered around a bit with in
>Shadowrun, but have not had -anyone- tamper with spells of this kind since
>First Edition (a while ago, yes... ;). Anyway, what would the relative
>levels of gravity be able to perform, and what would variable gravity
>increases/decreases incur as far as penalty numbers???
>
>Yes, this is a very serious question.

The problem with gravitic manipulation is that it is on the level of Ghost
Dance magic: more, even, because the Great Ghost Dance *released* energy
from 4 volcanoes, it did not actually create the energy. As I said, that is
the magnitude of energy necessary. 10E30 Joules is just an incredible
amount of energy ... consider that one ton of TNT is 4.184 E9 joules ...
10E30 joules is 250 trillion megatons. Again, that's just to get 1 G at 1
meter ...

It's far more efficient to use magic to counteract gravity (Levitation)
than to actually create gravity itself. I realize that 2nd edition Grimoire
mentions gravity as a "major environmental change" to give a spell a target
number to. I just don't think they know how major the change is.

The problem with the gravity lens idea mentioned by Robert is that gravity
is a conservative force, which, pardon the math, means that the Curl of the
gravity vector field is zero (the field is irrotational). A gravity lens
would violate this by creating rotational gravity fields, hence convert
gravity into a nonconservative force. Thus, potentials and such go away ...
plus, by definition any inverse square law force is conservative (via
Green's theorem). This obviously breaks a lot of physics.

Gravity (and General Relativity) is really understood in terms of
differential geometry, because gravity is the curvature of space time. The
geodesic path described by a falling body is the variational integral
minimum energy path. In GR you would replace the above gravitational vector
field with the General Tensor, but in either case, non-irrotational space
does strange things.

>-K

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 6
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 00:44:50 EST
In a message dated 10/27/1998 9:46:49 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:

>
> Change the direction to toss someone sideways, or walk on a wall
> (images of David Bowe in the Escher section of "Labyrinth" come to mind
> :)

This I could see being done relatively easily. Higher drain that Gecko Crawl,
but the effect would be a Personalized Gravity Planing spell that would do the
same effect.

> It would take one hell of a spell, but you could (theoretically) twist
> gravity to such an extent that opposing shear lines would cause damage.

For some reason, the old nightmares I had of two or more spelljammer(tm)
vessels of different masses coming together come to mind....

> And imagine this <EGMG>: a gravity tornado.
> Just some thoughts.

A What?!? Somebody explain this one to me, I might be really interested....

-K
Message no. 7
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:07:18 -0700
For the mere cost of a Thaum, K in the Shadows wrote:
/
/ In a message dated 10/27/1998 9:46:49 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
/ dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:
/
/ > And imagine this <EGMG>: a gravity tornado.
/ > Just some thoughts.
/
/ A What?!? Somebody explain this one to me, I might be really interested....

This is a pie in the sky idea and pretty much in the realm of science
fiction, but it might be fun to use for an insane magician NPC.

Create a square shaped plane of gravity. Make it so that everything on
one side of the plane will accelerate towards it, and anything on the
other side will accelerate away from it.

Wrap the plane into a narrow cone with the pulling side facing outwards
and the pushing side facing inwards.

As things fall through the wall of the cone they will be pushed up and
out the open end of the cone.

This would would be a manifestation spell, and the drain would be
outrageous, IMHO.

In my game I'd probably use it in the final battle and have the mage
die from the drain of the spell. Then the PCs would have the fun of
trying to dispel the "tornado" (which was quickened by the mage) before
it destroys the nearby town/city/country.

-David B.
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 8
From: Fixer <fixer@*******.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 12:43:21 -0500
On Wed, 28 Oct 1998, David Buehrer wrote:

->For the mere cost of a Thaum, K in the Shadows wrote:
->/
->/ In a message dated 10/27/1998 9:46:49 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
->/ dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG writes:
->/
->/ > And imagine this <EGMG>: a gravity tornado.
->/ > Just some thoughts.
->/
->/ A What?!? Somebody explain this one to me, I might be really interested....
->
->This is a pie in the sky idea and pretty much in the realm of science
->fiction, but it might be fun to use for an insane magician NPC.
->
->Create a square shaped plane of gravity. Make it so that everything on
->one side of the plane will accelerate towards it, and anything on the
->other side will accelerate away from it.
->
->Wrap the plane into a narrow cone with the pulling side facing outwards
->and the pushing side facing inwards.
->
->As things fall through the wall of the cone they will be pushed up and
->out the open end of the cone.
->
->This would would be a manifestation spell, and the drain would be
->outrageous, IMHO.
->
->In my game I'd probably use it in the final battle and have the mage
->die from the drain of the spell. Then the PCs would have the fun of
->trying to dispel the "tornado" (which was quickened by the mage) before
->it destroys the nearby town/city/country.

I thought to quicken a spell you had to sustain it for several
turns, and if this spell is as nasty as I think it is, the enemy mage
couldn't survive the drain long enough. How about a permanent damaging
manipulation, while you're at it? (Evil evil concept, I know, I torture
regenrating PCs with such spells cast at them by the evil NPCs. Who
cares if it breaks a few rules, it's fun! For me, anyway...)

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. 9
From: Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:44:47 EST
In a message dated 10/27/98 11:28:12 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> It's far more efficient to use magic to counteract gravity (Levitation)
> than to actually create gravity itself. I realize that 2nd edition Grimoire
> mentions gravity as a "major environmental change" to give a spell a
target
> number to. I just don't think they know how major the change is.

Okay, how does this sound from a simple reason ... take the Levitation spell
and apply it in reverse ... instead of picking something up and making it move
around, it is now trying to keep someone rooted into a single spot ... how
about using something along the lines of every success is a +1 modifier on the
target to perform some physical action?

-Herc
------ The Best Mechanic you can ever have.
Message no. 10
From: Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:55:45 -0800
>This is a pie in the sky idea and pretty much in the realm of science
>fiction, but it might be fun to use for an insane magician NPC.

It's not actually science fiction, but science *fantasy*.

>Create a square shaped plane of gravity. Make it so that everything on
>one side of the plane will accelerate towards it, and anything on the
>other side will accelerate away from it.

The problem is, there is no physics theories that have a repulsive
gravitational force, and several that argue against, such as General
Relativity. Gravity is a purely attractive force, which is one reason why
it dominates the universe even though it is by far the weakest scale force
in existance.

Several physicists have been looking for a "fifth force", or repulsive
gravity (it would make some theories much easier) but no luck. General
relativity explains non-quantum gravity quite well, and there simply isn't
"negative gravity" in it.

Again, gravity is basically differential geometry. It is impossible to
construct what you are postulating. There are cases where gravity takes on
repulsive properties but these are usually in spinning, relativistic
frame-dragged coordinate systems. And it makes sense in differential
geometry (as much as that quite often bizarre subject can be "sensible").

Some people take the point of view that magic invalidates physics. So fine
then, if that's what they want, do whatever passes their fancy. I prefer
the approach that magic operates within physical and metaphysical
principles, some of which are poorly understood, but in general can be
explicated in terms of physics. It seems to me that Shadowrun also takes
this view, or they wouldn't bother trying to explain theories of magic and
mentioning that astral energy can be converted into large amounts of
physical energy, thus satisfying conservation of energy, a basic principle
of physics that is a by-product of linear, symmetric time.

Breaking conservation of energy, for example, essentially means that time
becomes non-linear in its flow and may "speed up/slow down" in response to
some (probably) chaotic function. Some people might like this idea, but it
isn't the universe we live in (And probably such a universe would
destabilize very shortly after it was created).

Anyway.

>-David B.


--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu
Message no. 11
From: Micheal Feeney <Starrngr@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 15:39:54 EST
In a message dated 98-10-29 14:53:39 EST, you write:

> It's not actually science fiction, but science *fantasy*.
>
> >Create a square shaped plane of gravity. Make it so that everything on
> >one side of the plane will accelerate towards it, and anything on the
> >other side will accelerate away from it.
>
> The problem is, there is no physics theories that have a repulsive
> gravitational force, and several that argue against, such as General
> Relativity. Gravity is a purely attractive force, which is one reason why
> it dominates the universe even though it is by far the weakest scale force
> in existance.
>

>>Snip rest of looong explaination<<

Please, make it stop already....
Message no. 12
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 13:49:45 -0700
For the mere cost of a Thaum, Adam Getchell wrote:
/
/ The problem is, there is no physics theories that have a repulsive
/ gravitational force, and several that argue against, such as General
/ Relativity.

/ Several physicists have been looking for a "fifth force", or repulsive
/ gravity (it would make some theories much easier) but no luck.

They've never met my Aunt Maxine ;)

Seriously though, thanks for the info and insight.

-David B.
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 13
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 17:58:02 EST
In a message dated 10/29/1998 3:41:20 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
Starrngr@***.COM writes:

>
> >>Snip rest of looong explaination<<
>
> Please, make it stop already....
>
(*sounds of K laughing himself until he crashes his chair onto the floor*)

I'm soooo glad that I that I'm not the only one feeling this way.

-K ;)
Message no. 14
From: Steve Collins <einan@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:36:59 -0500
>>This is a pie in the sky idea and pretty much in the realm of science
>>fiction, but it might be fun to use for an insane magician NPC.
>
>It's not actually science fiction, but science *fantasy*.
>
>>Create a square shaped plane of gravity. Make it so that everything on
>>one side of the plane will accelerate towards it, and anything on the
>>other side will accelerate away from it.
>
>The problem is, there is no physics theories that have a repulsive
>gravitational force, and several that argue against, such as General
>Relativity. Gravity is a purely attractive force, which is one reason why
>it dominates the universe even though it is by far the weakest scale force
>in existance.
>
>Several physicists have been looking for a "fifth force", or repulsive
>gravity (it would make some theories much easier) but no luck. General
>relativity explains non-quantum gravity quite well, and there simply isn't
>"negative gravity" in it.

I don't know if anything has come out of this yet but last spring
Astronomers announced that they might have discovered just that. It seems
that the Universe is too large for it's age and that the rate of
expansion in the Universe is increasing not decreasing or remaining
stable. They may have come up with another explanation by now but I
haven't heard about it (not suprising since I heard about it in the NY
Times and stories like this almost never get followed up on).

Steve
Message no. 15
From: Steven McCormick <stardust@***.NET>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:18:08 -0600
At 11:55 AM 10/29/98 -0800, Adam Getchell wrote:
>The problem is, there is no physics theories that have a repulsive
>gravitational force, and several that argue against, such as General
>Relativity. Gravity is a purely attractive force, which is one reason why
>it dominates the universe even though it is by far the weakest scale force
>in existance.
>

Adam, you're losing your touch, I actually understood that. :)


>Again, gravity is basically differential geometry. It is impossible to
>construct what you are postulating. There are cases where gravity takes on
>repulsive properties but these are usually in spinning, relativistic
>frame-dragged coordinate systems. And it makes sense in differential
>geometry (as much as that quite often bizarre subject can be "sensible").
>

OK, now I can go back to my usual comment when Adam is talking... HUH? :)

>Some people take the point of view that magic invalidates physics. So fine
>then, if that's what they want, do whatever passes their fancy. I prefer
>the approach that magic operates within physical and metaphysical
>principles, some of which are poorly understood, but in general can be
>explicated in terms of physics....

But Adam, your depth of knowledge in physics is quite a bit beyond the
average Shadowrun player, probably quite a bit beyond most people in
general. I generally try to play my characters and games within the
framework of my education and backround (and usually only research
something beyond that framework if I feel that it will add to the
storyline). It's far easier for me to say "it's magic" than it is for me
to try and explain something using theories that, at best, I only have a
minimal understanding of.
One thing I am going to do though is start saving some of these posts. My
next PC is going to be able to rattle off some pretty cool stuff. :)

BlueMule
Message no. 16
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:35:26 +1000
Steve Collins writes:
>
> >Several physicists have been looking for a "fifth force", or repulsive
> >gravity (it would make some theories much easier) but no luck. General
> >relativity explains non-quantum gravity quite well, and there
> simply isn't
> >"negative gravity" in it.
>
> I don't know if anything has come out of this yet but last spring
> Astronomers announced that they might have discovered just that. It seems
> that the Universe is too large for it's age and that the rate of
> expansion in the Universe is increasing not decreasing or remaining
> stable. They may have come up with another explanation by now but I
> haven't heard about it (not suprising since I heard about it in the NY
> Times and stories like this almost never get followed up on).

*chuckle* I asked Adam about exactly this topic. Although I won't presume to
pass on email from a private discussion, I will say that there are answers
that do NOT require negative gravity.

Adam, maybe you should send that mail you sent to me to the list (or at
least to Steve).

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] Alternity, physics, and scramjets, 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!