Cooling and Cloud Calculations

[DarkDragonMedeus]

The limiting factor seems to be creating a new thread, which has been waiting on DDM's draft for well over 6 months.

Going to sleep for now, but I do have the draft basically done now. I just want to give DontTalkDT to proofread my draft, and maybe a few others in DMs and I'll post my 3 big posts.

 

[Antvasima]

Going to sleep for now, but I do have the draft basically done now. I just want to give DontTalkDT to proofread my draft, and maybe a few others in DMs and I'll post my 3 big posts.

Please keep us updated here.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Please keep us updated here.

I message'd him, I have work today. But off tomorrow. The draft will be posted in our DMs after work though.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you very much for helping out. There is no need to stress.

 

[InfiniteSped]

Going to sleep for now, but I do have the draft basically done now. I just want to give DontTalkDT to proofread my draft, and maybe a few others in DMs and I'll post my 3 big posts.

Did you finish those up btw?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Did you finish those up btw?

It's looking well so far mostly, but DontTalkDT is on hiatus and a few things I wanted to clear up with him before posting + he might be more interested in dealing with tier 0 stuff preferably.

 

[Agnaa]

@DarkDragonMedeus @RatherClueless I think, at this point, the wait has gotten ridiculous. Even though this rule is about verse-specific issues, I feel like the wait so far exceeds that, that it should still apply

For verse-specific threads, if the only opposing party does not reply for over 2 weeks without any notice or known/suspected extenuating circumstances, then the moderators should try to get the thread to completion without them, assuming that they'd probably not reply.

A new thread should be made, as was agreed with before. If DDM isn't able to provide arguments against, any other staff member who disagrees is free to do so.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

@DarkDragonMedeus @RatherClueless I think, at this point, the wait has gotten ridiculous. Even though this rule is about verse-specific issues, I feel like the wait so far exceeds that, that it should still apply

A new thread should be made, as was agreed with before. If DDM isn't able to provide arguments against, any other staff member who disagrees is free to do so.

I need to sleep soon, and I do agree it has been taking longer than expected. But that's because, my discussion with DontTalkDT in dms was going very slow is one thing. And yet even more important steps that also follow the topic have been discovered. And while I agree counter arguments that more or less reject the main argument and basic proposal of the OP should be given sooner rather than later. The part that still needs more time is the plans to overhaul the new calculation methods; aka plans to upgrade most of the calculated feats via the new calculation formula.

So far, DontTalkDT and I are more or less on the same page for the case by case, we agree ones done via water bending or other forms of elemental bending of specific substances are to be unchanged. Also including things like equivalent exchange. But wind freezing or laser freezing, he is in agreement with my new proposals. But it's various discussions involving those new methods and big step by step overhauls that are still ongoing. Since we want to make a rule cap similar to our Relativistic+ KE calculations that reach 0.96c and beyond. Feats involving the "Frozen to extremely close to AZ temperatures" do lead to very high results, but we are still deciding when the cap should be placed.

And on top of that, we acknowledge most current calculations have step 1 done, but not step 2 or step 3. But then the formula I discussed with him also ended up just being step 2; step 3 is another topic that I noticed hasn't been tackled much. But it's the factor that effectively freezing objects of greater surface area also equate to requiring exponentially higher pressure intensity and by extension exponentially higher amounts of Watts/M^2 to effectively perform feats on such magnitude. All IRL demonstrations of successful freeze rays have basically microscopic AoE. But a laser that freezes a star sized object for instance would not only require X times more energy than freezing a single drop of water (With X being a multitude greater volume), but it would definitely involve exponents. However, a reliable formular for such a detail has yet to be discovered. I also do want to be able to resolve this sooner, but a final overhaul project would absolutely need clarified steps.

I will be able to finally dump my triple post rebuttal hopefully in a day or two. But unfortunately, it might actually be even longer for the final project to get done.

 

[Agnaa]

Improved formulas for cooling calculations should wait until after we decide whether they should be done at all.

But sure, two days for the triple post rebuttal, after which Rather can make a followup thread.

 

[Antvasima]

I will ask DontTalk to prioritise this discussion.

 

[Agnaa]

Rather has exams right now, and will need time to read up on this discussion. So they won't be able to make a continuation thread until mid-December.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I suppose that we likely have to wait then.

 

[InfiniteSped]

I need to sleep soon, and I do agree it has been taking longer than expected. But that's because, my discussion with DontTalkDT in dms was going very slow is one thing. And yet even more important steps that also follow the topic have been discovered. And while I agree counter arguments that more or less reject the main argument and basic proposal of the OP should be given sooner rather than later. The part that still needs more time is the plans to overhaul the new calculation methods; aka plans to upgrade most of the calculated feats via the new calculation formula.

So far, DontTalkDT and I are more or less on the same page for the case by case, we agree ones done via water bending or other forms of elemental bending of specific substances are to be unchanged. Also including things like equivalent exchange. But wind freezing or laser freezing, he is in agreement with my new proposals. But it's various discussions involving those new methods and big step by step overhauls that are still ongoing. Since we want to make a rule cap similar to our Relativistic+ KE calculations that reach 0.96c and beyond. Feats involving the "Frozen to extremely close to AZ temperatures" do lead to very high results, but we are still deciding when the cap should be placed.

And on top of that, we acknowledge most current calculations have step 1 done, but not step 2 or step 3. But then the formula I discussed with him also ended up just being step 2; step 3 is another topic that I noticed hasn't been tackled much. But it's the factor that effectively freezing objects of greater surface area also equate to requiring exponentially higher pressure intensity and by extension exponentially higher amounts of Watts/M^2 to effectively perform feats on such magnitude. All IRL demonstrations of successful freeze rays have basically microscopic AoE. But a laser that freezes a star sized object for instance would not only require X times more energy than freezing a single drop of water (With X being a multitude greater volume), but it would definitely involve exponents. However, a reliable formular for such a detail has yet to be discovered. I also do want to be able to resolve this sooner, but a final overhaul project would absolutely need clarified steps.

I will be able to finally dump my triple post rebuttal hopefully in a day or two. But unfortunately, it might actually be even longer for the final project to get done.

Did you finish this up btw?

 

[RatherClueless]

New thread

This can be closed now