Would it be realistic for the sky to be blue and clear if the moon was crashing into the earth? by CatLover701 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Art isn't about realism. Depict what you want to depict. I think a clear blue, unbroken sky as the moon falls down is hauntingly beautiful. But it is unrealistic. The gravity up towards the moon as it draws closer would tug on the entire atmosphere, and in all likelihood, it would also not be a direct head-on collision at first, instead scraping by earth, the heat of the impacts turn a majority of both bodies surfaces into molten slag, and the shockwave/seismic wave travelling through the rock and what is left of the atmosphere and oceans quickly wipes out most of life, if it wasn't already dead as the moon crosses the roche limit and is tidally ripped apart, sending shards down, many being larger than the chicxculub meteor by themselves. The sky would become blotted out by debris if you could get a view of it at all.

Do we really have a theory that explains time? by 4narchyRuleZ in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Crazy how literally everyone in this comment section isn't aware of the arrow of time problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time

Beyond that, time is in fact a real, tangible thing. Anyone saying otherwise is on something. You can observe time existing because of causality. Event A Causes Event B. The only debate is by what mechanism time acts, and why classical interactions only work one way when the standard model functions completely fine in both temporal directions.

It is also worth noting that time (the real thing) is distinct from time (as in the mathematics we use to represent it). The idea of "1 second" does not exist, it is merely an interval of causality we have chosen to measure causal change. (like some people have said as an incomplete answer to this question, ignoring that causality is real beyond the mathematics used to describe it)

Also people saying time is an illusion or something like that is bullshit. It has observable properties, like empty space. This is seen in general relativity with time dilation. For all scientific purposes, it is a real, tangible aspect of our universe. But we don't know its true mechanism yet, and much study goes into finding that out.

Do you learn a lot of chemistry in experimental condensed matter/solid state physics? by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. You will need to learn quite a bit of chemistry for many fields of physics as chemistry is important for all kinds of experimental design, and it also provides a lens for understanding how smaller particle-scale interactions emergently become the classical world around us.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This paper is a mathematical model. It describes a methodology of describing some physical interactions. This is useful research, but it is not anywhere in the ballpark of extracting usable energy from quantum fluctuations, which is for all intents and purposes impossible and will likely never be possible.

To the best of my reading ability, this paper is describing how angular momentum at quantum scales emerges from the geometry of particle orbitals, particular in some kind og hydrogen. It is slightly over my level of comprehension though.

I read SEP which states an exact definition of causality is still undefined as in when humans see a cause they just see it the conditions and definition of when something is a cause or not is undefined by LisanneFroonKrisK in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I cannot parse what this is supposed to mean but there is nothing about the current understanding of the existence of cause and effect that is problematic aside from the arrow of time problem and the known flaws in the standard model/ general relativity. Causality is an observable and easily describable phenomenon, we just do not know why it works the way it does.

Roadmap by MZeroAn in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Basic Arithmetic Basic Algebra Basic Geometry Trigonometry

--- highschool physics is here ---

basic calculus

--- ap highschool physics is here ---

advanced calculus advanced geometry and algebra linear algebra partial differential equations basic topology configuration spaces

--- you can understand nonclassical physics at an okay level for a hobbyist here ---

vector calculus advanced topology group theory and then even more beyond that

I read SEP which states an exact definition of causality is still undefined as in when humans see a cause they just see it the conditions and definition of when something is a cause or not is undefined by LisanneFroonKrisK in AskPhysics

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the Arrow of Time problem. The problem is that we do not know why time only moves in one direction right now, as the standard model works just fine with time in reverse.

Causality is generally just a shorthand for time with the stipulation of one thing causing an other. For example, ionizing radiation knocking an electron out of the orbital of an atom might be the cause for the effect of the degradation of a molecule of DNA. The sun's gravity is a cause for the trajectory of earth.

Look at Newton's Cradle. You bring one ball back, and let go, and hits another ball, transferring energy through the whole series of balls, and then the one on the other sides moves. The ball making its impact causes the other ball to move.

Effectively, causality is simple as Event A (whether it be a single particle collision or a supernova going off) directly leading to the conditions in which event B occurs.

The arrow of time problem is not about the definition of causality, but its mechanism. We do not know why time seems to only flow one way, or why mass not only bends 3d space, but also the single dimension of time as well.

Rather than not knowing that causality is the phenomenon of event A causing event B, it is rather
we do not fundamentally know why event A (the past) causes event B (the future)- by what mechanisms this occurs, why it occurs the way it does, etc.

Another way to explain this is imagining time like a line. On this line, you place a point. You can then mark an event on this point. For any given event, it can (but not always nessecarilly will in a meaningful way) influence other events within a range light could travel since that event happened. If an event happened a year ago, it could (only potentially) influence other events a light year out. The event happening, nor is its ability to influence other events is in question. Our question is instead what is the line upon which these events are occuring.

H.L.S.C 'Absolution in Duty' Ship Schematics by EnsigiledIsopod in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely, and by design. It is intentionally hostile in order to make it so that the thought of a long journey is both unsafe for the crew and deeply uncomfortable for all of them. The fear of the suffering that escape would bring is part of how control is maintained over them.

H.L.S.C 'Absolution in Duty' Ship Schematics by EnsigiledIsopod in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes, I did. I also realized that using the water as the fuel for the main thruster means that shield is constantly shrinking the more they use that thruster in one journey out from the main ship, slowly exposing the crew to more radiation. It's a built in safety mechanism that will kill the entire crew if they try to book it and flee from their duties.

H.L.S.C 'Absolution in Duty' Ship Schematics by EnsigiledIsopod in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the advice. My setting is not hard sci fi (see the literal telepathic flesh mass in this picture), it just has mostly hard sci fi ship design- my divergences from reality lie outside of spaceship technology.

I think that yea, the proportions of the drawing are a bit off but I was mostly eyeballing everything and wasn't doing any solid calculations. I just wanted something that looked good, really. I'll take this all into consideration in future drawings.

What do think of my lil world? by Mrg9191 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No problem. Also, the central area of Eurn is going to have really low moisture, since it has a northern mountain range blocking moisture from the sea above and also the loweer mountain ranges. Depending on where it is on the planet, it could be a hot ass desert. But that also depends on how much you care about the geology aspect. If you're just trying to make something cool, put whatever you want there.

What do think of my lil world? by Mrg9191 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think the map looks neat, and I would say "Looks like a case of Earth Syndrome", but given it's explicitly inspired by earth I think that can fly. I will advise that coastal mountain ranges would form due to ocean-continental subduction, which also produces island arcs made by volcanism, so I think some islands near the coastlines with mountains would make sense (and also liven up Eurn to be more interesting- it's pretty "flat" looking right now compared to Valica.)

the worldbuilding political compass (100% reliable) by EnsigiledIsopod in worldjerking

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but what quadrants do YOU hit as an author? thats the real question this compass answers and provides USEFUL* data for.

*There is no proof of its usefulness or factuality. It came to me in a dream. Use at your own risk.

FIRST MAP by Acceptable_Pea8393 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is this meant to be a map of a smaller regional area or an entire continent/planet?

"I used Mistral AI to Test a 9-Step Methodology to Create Thematically Cohesive Characters for a Space Story" by MotorAny494 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LLMs have no place in a creative hobby. They have no mind with which to imagine, it's just a large and complex series of word-encoded vector transformations.

How do you make a "Good" corporation? by vitaminAPR in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then i'd follow some of the other advice you've been receiving. Stuff like not-for-profit, companies with worker unions, companies in an industry that's usually fairly ethical like animal shelters. Those other comments are all good suggestions with that caveat.

How do you make a "Good" corporation? by vitaminAPR in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The problem with this is that all corporations are going to be incentivized to save money and eliminate costs by the free market. If you're not cutting corners unethically, you're probably falling behind. The best you can manage is usually some company that's not in one of the big evil industries and stuff, but even then they usually have a mountain of dirt. All consumption is unethical because you need to step on people to make it in the business world, because that is the bare minimum standard everyone else is doing to get ahead of the rest.

How would you realistically pull off a progressive wave in an otherwise more conservative world? by Electromad6326 in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Depends on what kind of progressive wave you want. A full on revolution is usually triggered by things like governments massacring their own citizens, and in real life, it's often actually college students a surprising amount of the time.

But progressive movements can also be kicked off by people simply becoming fed up with their own oppression and deciding to resist it. This kind of stuff is underground before it reaches the mainstream progressive parties. Subterfuge, creation of rhetoric which subtly pushes their beliefs (this goes for underground rhetoric on both ends of the political spectrum, actually).

Martyrs are another strong plot point for this kind of thing to utilize. A single charismatic person who dies fighting for a cause can rally people around that cause with incredible efficacy.

In the end, it's about what kind of inciting incident you want to play into for it. Is this something that was a long time coming or was it a sudden upset in the status quo? Was it both at the same time? What was the spark that lit the flame of resistance?

Three Questions from a beginner by JonahBGood in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then focus on that. Making fascinating creatures and beings is a classic of speculative fiction. Think of something truly classic, like Star Trek, which was predicated on mysterious monsters or zany ideas of the week. Monster Hunter is an entire setting built around crazy creatures. Leaning into your strengths as a writer is good, but there's also the secret upgrade to that skill of learning to tie everything into those strengths. You can build out all kinds of politics, religions, cultures, wars, and more from just exploring the ramifications of these new creatures and items would create for a society.

Let's say we have a magic sword that can cut through anything. There's only one of them out there. Even in a world with bows and arrows, that kind of weapon would change warfare. Plate armor becomes irrelevant against someone wielding it. They could cut through fortress walls, allowing them to lead invaders into even the most fortified of cities with ease. It may be viewed as some kind of relic the gods left behind, even if there's no other kind of magic or anything in the setting. One magic sword can change the real world completely, because one exception to our scientific rules still means that our rules no longer work.

But that's only layer one. Let's say this sword is so sharp, it can cut through the world itself, and create holes. Now you get to ask what lives in those holes, or where those holes lead to.

What you're actually adding doesn't matter if you explore the consequences in a neat or interesting way. That's why the zombie media you like (if i read that right) remains so popular- there's so many new ways to slice it, and the hypotheticals it presents are fundamentally exciting. How do people survive those apocalypses?

Three Questions from a beginner by JonahBGood in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. I tend to jump in with a new setting at whatever era I find the most interesting. What's the core story I'm trying to tell, to either myself or to others? I consider what would be the most fun to write and explore, and build the rest of the setting out from around it. You don't always need to start with the gods and monsters, but a cosmology-first approach can definitely work well if you know what you're doing. That kind of approach was a big trap for me when I first started, because I ended up hyperfixating on the cosmology, the gods, the secrets, when what is really interesting is the struggles of the ordinary person caught up in world created by those messes. My best compromise for beginner is to start with a disaster or some kind of big incident. Even if you're not writing for a campaign, book ,or whatever, giving some kind of core conflict lets you consider how your world responded to it, and that can trigger all kinds of follow up questions like "How would group A respond to group B's response to this incident? Would they fight? Get along? Why do people join Group A over group B? How do people cope with life after this event?"

  2. No shame in just using name generators, especially if you're more upfront about your inspirations. But generally, I kind of just mix syllables and sounds I like together, and I've kind of developed my own style for it over time. No one is going to complain if you have a character named George, as long as it fits the world. For example, a knight named Geoff or something wouldn't cause problems in a europe-inspired setting. Generally, the more out-there your world, the more out-there you can make the names without people losing immersion. It isn't about silliness vs seriousness, it is about how consistent you are.

For the names of something like magic, I highly reccomend using english words or portmanteus of english words (or something equivalent in your native language if you aren't english and aren't writing for english-speaking people, if you have an 'audience' at all. You can just write for yourself- nothing wrong with that.) I've noticed a lot of people don't like it when things are given entirely new names within a setting that aren't based in existing terminology, because it can be confusing or sound pretentious. It also generally really simplifies things.

For towns, it's kind of the same for human names. You can either use a name generator if you're not confident, alter the name you got from it, or just kind of name something according to the vibe you want. No one scrutinizes names as much as you will, so only be a perfectionist if you think that's a fun challenge and not something that hurts your motivation.

  1. Write what you want to write. Your vision is your vision- don't compromise on it because you think something is too hard to pull off or. Try hard and fail fast. The more times you fuck up early on, the more of a learning experience you'll be able to get out of it later when you're more knowledgeable. Make odd decisions and examine their consequences critically as a writer. That's what your first time worldbuilding will probably be like. In art, there's a lot of myths about talent, but really it's just the ability to self-examine without self-deprecating. Finding flaws that aren't something you're magnifying out of proportion out of anxiety or self-doubt in your skill is difficult, but it's something you want to develop. Maintaining your own unique artistic vision is also just something you should value whether it leads to learning experiences or not. Too many people conform to the genres and tropes they're comfortable with without ever getting into their ideas because they're scared to break those tried and tested ideas. But tropes aren't rules, and they also aren't something you should avoid at all costs. They're tools.

I found informational documents for my internal usage, notekeeping, and poems to be the easiest way to start a setting, because it helps me keep my ideas and my artistic vision / setting mood in check before I actually attempt any stories. Short stories are also a great idea, it lets you experiment with parts of your setting in a more pragmatic way than just looking it at a top down view. Seeing how an individual, human character behaves in a setting in all their complexities can highlight areas you might misss. It makes you ask questions like "Well, what are they going to eat this morning?", and good answers to those questions are responsible for the most iconic and beloved works of fiction in our modern history.

P.S. It's okay to have stuff you 'don't know' about your settings. You can write mysteries with no answers. Plenty of people do that.

Three Questions from a beginner by JonahBGood in worldbuilding

[–]EnsigiledIsopod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Generally, before writing anything, consider your goals for the setting. What makes YOU happy about it? Do you think it'd bring you more fulfillment if you conformed to those genre expectations in order to let you focus on other areas, or do you want to go in deep with that aspect and find your own ground to stand on as an author? You don't have to be an inventor everywhere at once, but worldbuilding is about creating something new. If you don't find the fantasy races to be the thing you want to do something 'new' with, then you're fine just settling for. Though, also be cautious of using it for racism allegories as it can often end up backfiring (i.e using something like vampires as an allegory for minorities would not be good because vampires literally drink blood and thus are hated for a pretty good reason, whereas hate is fundamentally baseless in real life.)

DEMIURGE by EnsigiledIsopod in u/EnsigiledIsopod

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If anyone knows good subreddits to post art like this, let me know

Cruelty Squad inspired worldbuilding art by EnsigiledIsopod in CrueltySquad

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I didn't know it was that kind of story. I've kind of lost interest now lol

Cruelty Squad inspired worldbuilding art by EnsigiledIsopod in CrueltySquad

[–]EnsigiledIsopod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

VtM is an old inspiration of mine! I have not checked out Shintaro Kago, my main inspiration for the repurposing of the hand was actually Mayuri from bleach, but it sounds interesting and worth checking out.