Activity for Canina
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #290566 |
I don't have a ready answer for you, but one book you might want to check out is *A City on Mars: Can we settle space, Should we settle space, and Have we really thought this through* by Weinersmith and Weinersmith. One of the issues discussed is precisely the effects of not having the protection of ... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289815 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #289815 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Should we remove "What would X sport in space look like ?" questions Let's look at the (rather poorly named) FAQ page in the help center which tries to specify in a bit more detail than the few words of a site name what the site's scope is: > Scientific Speculation is for questions that arise from worldbuilding and other speculative developments that can be extrapo... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Comment | Post #287511 |
I agree. Asking how to adapt a specific game to a new environment (such as a low-gravity environment), while somewhat broad, is still *focused* and answers can be judged with some degree of objectivity on how well they address criteria laid out in the question. However, a question simply asking "What... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #287511 | Question closed | — | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #287495 |
Technically, I'm pretty sure that on the surface of Earth's moon is not a microgravity environment. By any reasonable human-centric definition it's certainly a *low-gravity* environment, however. 0.02 g might be borderline. Are you actually primarily interested in microgravity environments (as the qu... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #287351 | Question closed | — | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #287001 |
@#8103 Well, *all else* equal, it's certainly a reasonable assumption that in the absence of one contributing factor, the probability of an event would be reduced. That said, an increase in the probability of an event (in this case, extreme weather events) over time does not necessarily mean that suc... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #287001 |
This question appears to assume that climate change "paused" due to a reduced amount of aerosols in the atmosphere, but I don't see anything in it to support such an interpretation of facts. Your quote from the UK Met Office mentions air quality and visibility, but is there any reason to conclude tha... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #286663 | Question closed | — | almost 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285985 |
I don't know about fire risk, but since you specifically mention spacecraft, it's probably worth keeping in mind that with any kind of reaction drive in space, a *major* consideration will be to reduce mass. If you can get away with even just a 1% reduction in the mass of the spacecraft hull, you're ... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285964 |
I'm not sure 1000 km/s (1 Mm/s) really qualifies as relativistic speed. Even 30000 km/s (30 Mm/s) seems borderline. Consider the [special relativisitic colinear velocity addition formula](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula#Special_relativity); the factor *c*² likely still dominat... (more) |
— | about 2 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283763 | Question closed | — | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284325 |
You use the word "fluid", but I think you meant "liquid". The four [fundamental phases of matter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter#Four_fundamental_states) are solid, liquid, gas, and [plasma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)). (Plasma is often overlooked.) To borrow Wikipe... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283763 |
So identifying an individual using an attribute like "assigned name" is bureaucratic and "reducing an entire human being's history into mere technical information", but "computerized-genetic-human-identification" or "world-government-microchip-identification" somehow wouldn't be? I fail to see the lo... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283382 |
I think that's covered by "Temperature control might be believable." in the question. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283382 |
Here's another way to visualize how large 145 Gm² actually is, which might work better for people outside of North America. The distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 150 million km (150 Gm). So the floor area (not land area) of such a building would be almost exactly the same as a slice of spac... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281855 |
@#54232 I don't see why they would be categorically *off topic*, at least. As the answer says: "It stands to reason that the harder sciences will to some degree likely be easier to extrapolate from and speculate about while providing concrete reasoning, but that's about the type of answers that can b... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281855 |
@#54232 The FAQ calls out both [faster-than-light travel and shapeshifters](https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/help/faq) as on topic, so I would say that yes, heavily modified science is perfectly acceptable. For your particular example, it would certainly be possible to take known physics a... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283017 |
Broadly, whether or not a particular question is on topic in one place does not depend on whether that same question is on topic or off topic somewhere else. It needs to be on topic where it's posted; that it might *also* on topic elsewhere should be immaterial. (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283017 |
@#54232 I don't think there should be a *blanket* rule to that effect, at least. Just because a question is on topic on [Linux Systems](https://linux.codidact.com/) doesn't mean it would be off topic on [Power Users](https://powerusers.codidact.com/); likewise, just because something is on topic on, ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283286 |
@#8046 I think at least science-based is sufficiently settled by https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/posts/276346 and https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/posts/275792 (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283286 | Initial revision | — | over 2 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: A few questions as I dip my toes in the water here That's a lot of questions all lumped together in one, and as I don't have an hour or two to write up good answers for each of them, short ones will have to do for now. > 1. There are 500+ tags, apparently not a single one of them has a summary or a wiki. They're obviously copied from worldbuilding... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283017 |
Post edited: |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283017 |
@#53922 At least to me, this is a different question because it asks what sets SciSpec apart from, in OP's words, "regular science Q&A", while the other question asks which scientific fields are in scope on SciSpec. There is relevance, but the answers are going to, at a minimum, have a different focu... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283017 |
Post edited: |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283017 |
@#54114 As written in your comment, that feels way too broad, and I would probably close a question that boils down to that on that basis alone. However, suppose you narrowed it down to, say, "what would be the effect on low-growing Earth plant life if objects with property X suddenly no longer cast ... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283017 | Initial revision | — | over 2 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Where does this differ from a regular Science Q&A? As I see it, the operative word in answering the question you're asking here is speculation. Now, of course, it's almost impossible to capture every nuance in a site name, which is why we have a paragraph on what the site is all about in the help section. (It can probably be expanded and improved upo... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282048 |
I could be wrong, but the question reads to me rather like "Company X has developed a product of type Y. Are products of type Y chemically feasible?". That would seem to make the answer rather self-evident; if products of type Y *weren't* chemically feasible, then company X would have been hard press... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282030 |
@JohnDoea For this type of question, you might want to chime in on the [*Medical science site* proposal](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/276933). (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #282030 | Question closed | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #282030 |
How is this a question about [extrapolating from science](/help/faq)? I'm no subject matter expert, but to me, it reads like a question about how a real-world medical treatment works in the real world, with no speculative element involved. Could you please edit your question to somehow clarify, empha... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #246310 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281854 |
Post edited: Add 'scope' tag |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281855 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Which sciences are welcome? Myself, I think that all sciences are in scope on this site. (We're already barely getting any traffic; artificially restricting scope further probably won't help much with that.) The way I see it is: if it can be reasoned about using the scientific method, then it probably won't be off topic just be... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #236597 |
Post edited: fix post import Unicode corruption |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281763 | Nominated for promotion | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277021 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #277146 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #206263 |
Post edited: The science-based tag is redundant here, as all posts are expected to be based in science to some degree |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #245636 |
Post edited: The science-based tag is redundant here, as all posts are expected to be based in science to some degree |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #245636 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #215363 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #206265 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #232832 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281706 |
Post edited: All questions on Scientific Speculation Codidact are expected to be based in and answers based in science, so the science-based tag is superfluous |
— | almost 3 years ago |