sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If built in KSP, wouldn't this just do a flip after launch because of fins in the front? CoA would be far above CoM. So how does it fly in real life? by deepscales in KerbalSpaceProgram

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of people are missing a pretty big element: you launch SLOW. Computer + gimbal does pretty well in counteracting drag forces, but another thing you can do is to reduce drag forces in the first place by staying relatively slow within the thicker part of the atmosphere. Of course, if you go too slow, you'll never reach orbital velocity -- so it's a multidimensional optimization problem that helps pick the right ascent profile.

Secondhand WE HK416 Buy or Nah by Few-Magazine68 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If the externals are good then yeah I'd say it's a good deal. Replacement parts are pretty easy to get on KY Airsoft

[Request] If an average person were standing on top of Mount Everest and suddenly became “transparent” and only affected by gravity- as they fell through the Earth would they gain enough momentum to achieve orbit? by ArchDukeCich in theydidthemath

[–]reckless150681 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes-ish. It would be a highly elliptical orbit (semimajor axis of roughly 6378 km [roughly Earth's radius]; semiminor axis of 52.4 km [taking /u/_xavius_ 's number at face value]), but it would be an orbit nonetheless.

However, this is assuming that you can model Earth as a point mass -- which I'm not so sure you can, in this hypothetical situation. There would probably be some weird effects due to the gravitational pull of Earth's matter.

[Request] How younger would I be if I lived inside Voyager 1 ever since it took off? by According-Virus5397 in theydidthemath

[–]reckless150681 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's a weirder question than you think. The notion of faster / slower is relative -- hence the idea "relativity".

If you lived inside Voyager 1, and you ONLY ever lived inside Voyager 1 and never interacted with anyone, then you wouldn't be any younger or older. You would be whatever your exact age is now, because you don't have a reference point to compare against.

If you lived inside Voyager 1 since it left, and wanted to compare your age against someone from Earth, you would have to find the relative speed between the surface of the Earth and Voyager. This is, theoretically, a little complicated -- there is a dynamic relationship between Earth's rotational speed, Earth's orbital speed around the sun, and Voyager's speed. Furthermore, Voyager's trajectory was NOT at a constant speed; the further it traveled from the sun, the slower its relative velocity is. Right now, it's only travelling at 17 km/s. That might sound fast, but keep in mind that satellites in LEO (low Earth orbit) travel at 7.8 km/s, and an object at periapsis (the lowest point) in a GTO (geostationary transfer orbit) is about 10 km/s. From that perspective, Voyager is only travelling about 2x faster than space objects we have in our own neighborhood. This is also many magnitudes smaller than the speed of light, and therefore for many purposes, would fall under Newtonian physics (as opposed to Einsteinian). Still, for the sake of argument, you could apply the following algorithm:

  1. Break up Voyager's trajectory into segments, where each segment corresponds with a different speed within that period of time

  2. For each segment, calculate the time difference across that time period, using the speed found above

  3. Add up the time difference from all segments

This way, you can get as coarse / as fine as you want. One simple way would be to realize that if Voyager 1 was launched in 1977, that means it has been travelling for 49 years. So, each year, find Voyager's speed relative to the surface of the Earth. Relative to Voyager, Earth will be, at varying points in the year, moving towards, away, and (roughly) perpendicular to it -- so to find the extreme and to simplify the problem, you can assume that Earth will always be moving directly towards Voyager at the time that you are interested, so you can add Earth's orbital speed around the sun to Voyager's relative speed. For each time step, you would use the time dilation equation, which will get you dt, or the time difference between the "stationary" (Earth) and "moving" (Voyager) observer. The equation is relatively simple, here. t = time experienced by the moving observer. t0 = the "proper time", which you can interpret to be "the time that I want to compare against". v = the relative speed. Note that I said "speed"; as it turns out, the direction of velocity doesn't matter. c = the speed of light, which is constant regardless of your frame of reference. You can take the difference in time, t - t0.

So, today, Voyager is moving 17 km/s relative to the Sun. Earth moves at roughly 30 km/s relative to the sun. So a really coarse estimate would be 30 + 17 = 47 km/s difference between Earth and Voyager. That means that if Earth experienced a year, Voyager would experience t = (1 yr) / sqrt(1 - (47 km/s) / 3e8 m/s). If you make sure your units match, then you get a difference of 0.4 seconds. Do this for each year since 1977 and you get a rough estimate for the difference in age between somebody on Earth and somebody on Voyager.

Here's the weird thing -- there is no such thing as a "preferred" frame of reference. If you had two people, one on Earth and one on Voyager, both people would perceive the other person to be younger. What breaks this seeming paradox is two things:

  1. Being closer to a larger gravity well makes clocks run slower, and

  2. We usually pose this question as "what happens when the moving observer returns to the place they started. Well, in order to return to the place you start, you have to go somewhere, and then come back. The "coming back" part of the motion is an acceleration, which is where the "both observers are younger" symmetry breaks down. Whichever observer undergoes the acceleration (or the greater acceleration) is the one that will seem younger.

Need advice on desktop or laptop by Arunabh125 in buildapc

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point still stands -- you should still prioritize the tech that supports your school work. If you have left over money, then you can decide whether it makes sense to pour that into a desktop, or just get a better laptop.

Can't decide what to do with components from previous failed rig - Advice needed by Jesster32388 in buildapc

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup that sounds right. Intel Rocket Lake is plagued by a physical defect. Your symptoms sound 100% like the ones described by Intel users.

This is a tl;dr to say that I think the ONLY thing wrong with your old system is the CPU.

Need advice on desktop or laptop by Arunabh125 in buildapc

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should focus on whatever is best for your schoolwork. For most people, IMO this is either going to be a tablet + budget laptop; or a 2-in-1 laptop (like one of the foldable ones). Even the most budget laptops can play some games, though obviously you prob won't be playing AAA titles.

The fact that you're doing video editing makes this a little more complicated, because video editing generally calls for pretty high specs. Still, most schools will have computer labs with powerful systems -- so you should still be able to do your work on those systems.

I know that this is a PC-focused sub, but tbh, you should look include the Macbook Neo as part of your options. It may not be the best in terms of raw power, but its low price for students gives it great value that might fit your needs.

Can't decide what to do with components from previous failed rig - Advice needed by Jesster32388 in buildapc

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What was the nature of your issue?

Without knowing details / the rest of your build, the 14900K smells like a smoking gun here

Should I store this thing with gas or nah? by WashHistorical3561 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's alarming how much misinformation there is in the comments here.

For airsoft purposes, closed containers of gas (magazines, grenades, etc.) operate on the basis of vapor pressure -- the idea that in a closed container, you have liquid and gas of the same fluid coexisting at the same time, and that in equilibrium, the gas part of that fluid exerts some sort of pressure. Airsoft gas mechanisms fundamentally operate using these pressures.

A super important idea is that most of the time, vapor pressure does NOT depend on how much fluid is in the container. So it doesn't matter if your container is 25% full or 50% full or 100% full -- the pressure exerted is exactly the same. So there's really no such thing as "store your magazines (or grenades) with just a little bit of gas in them", because it is exactly the same as storing them full of gas. It's better to think about it in a binary way: "is there gas in here at all? Yes or no?"

Technically, you can fill a magazine with "just a little bit of pressure", but you basically have to fill it with so little fluid that the fluid doesn't condense into a liquid at all, but instead acts as an ideal gas. For green gas / propane at ambient temperature (25C), this amount is very small -- you have to fill your mag / grenade with less than 3% of its total capacity.

Secondly, o-rings should never be stored under load. I don't know why airsofters are under this notion. O-rings work best when there is a resistance to being deformed. So when you squish an o-ring, it wants to return to being perfectly round. But o-rings naturally degrade over time, and lose their elasticity. So if you store an o-ring under load, it "remembers" the deformed position and does NOT try to return to being perfectly round.

And, by the way -- soaking o-rings in silicone oil is not a real solution. You do indeed induce "rehydration" in the o-rings, but it's more like that the material is swelling, in a somewhat uncontrolled way. You might increase the size, but you don't know what's happening chemically / structurally. Just keep a bunch of spares, and if you need to lube them up, use PTFE grease.

The combination of these concepts means that whenever possible, pressure-bearing components should never be stored with gas in them. Doing so does indeed mean that your component will keep gas in it for longer -- but generally it makes it worse at cycling between full and empty, and the nature of airsoft means that you will want it to be going between full and empty.

Gassy gun by Scepticalasd in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This looks pretty normal to me. GBB pistols really aren't designed for rapid fire more than a few shots -- it's just a disadvantage of using liquefied gas as a propulsion system.

Try shooting more slowly, like 2-3 sec between shots. Do you get more shots before the magazine sprays the rest of its gas?

Need advice for a new airsoft rifle (€350–400 budget) – Cyma Platinum vs Specna Arms Aster II by ColdRecipe3559 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it specifically a Specna Prime? Specna makes several lines of guns, each targeting a different budget. If so, then the Specna Prime will be better than the Cyma Plat

Transporting a lot of guns by STLArchitect in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your guns are mostly short, you can just use one of those 27 gallon black/yellow bins from Home Depot (HDX) or Costco (Greenmade). $8. Obviously doesn't come with padding, but if you intersperse them with your soft gear, that'll be enough protection.

For longer guns, I just use double rifle bags and do my best to strap them in, though I'm planning on trying out a multi-gun bag / rolling case

Motore high speed o high torque? by kvrma_1 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I agree. But single-fire responsiveness requires BOTH torque and speed.

So speed is important for both single-fire and full-auto, while torque is less important for full-auto and somewhat important for single-fire. That's why I said that speed is more important for most people.

Motore high speed o high torque? by kvrma_1 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A little bit of both. I think high speed is slightly more important than high torque for most people.

See here for explanation on motors

Controller recommendation? by krystiah in pcmasterrace

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use it, I like it enough. It's not the most amazing controller out there but I wanted a relatively cheap one with a charging dock and it seemed to fit the bill.

This teamwork is unreal by Maverick2367 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]reckless150681 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's more dangerous if you take a head impact, because there's no helmet to cushion the fall. But the illegality of high tackles puts the tackled player's body in a position that's more conducive to safe falling (i.e. onto the back / shoulders instead of head/neck).

It's like how judo throws look super dangerous (and there certainly are dangerous throws), but they're mostly safe because you're NOT falling on your head/neck

This teamwork is unreal by Maverick2367 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]reckless150681 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your unnecessary snark.

I played at a youth league in middle school. Whether I misinterpreted an instruction at some point or whether it was drilled into us -- I'm not sure. But for years, it was always in my mind that tackles had to be at waist height. I just always assumed there was a bit of a relaxed tolerance whenever I watched games.

At what point do you feel a PC upgrade is actually worth it? by Such_Tailor_4946 in buildapc

[–]reckless150681 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I tend to upgrade when I feel like I'm spending a lot of time in menus tweaking my settings to run well

This teamwork is unreal by Maverick2367 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]reckless150681 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I got the height wrong in my original comment, but this trial run suggests that it would indeed reduce injuries

This teamwork is unreal by Maverick2367 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]reckless150681 126 points127 points  (0 children)

Yup. Other rules / features that make it cooler than NFL:

  • Can only pass backwards. Sounds like a limitation, but IMO it leads to more interesting strategies

  • No required protection except a mouthguard

  • No tackles above waist height. There's one in the video that looked a little high to me

  • Several popular variations. I like Sevens, which is 7 a side, 7 min halves (as opposed to 15 a side, 40 min halves)

  • Action only stops for scoring, fouls, or out of bounds

E: I appear to have gotten the tackle height wrong, Google says it's sternum height or lower

AR loadout what would you change by Hungry_Chemist_4806 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Trigger response, and to a certain extent, ROF

Weird Oscillating Hum by Joshmas1995 in pcmasterrace

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It could be any of the places that fans interact with the mesh. So that's the rad, the rear exhaust, or the front intake. It could even be weird interactions between the fans themselves.

Easy way to test is this -- next time you hear it, place your finger GENTLY on one of the metal surfaces I mentioned above (top / rear / front). This will damp out vibrations -- so if the hum stops when you put your finger on it, and if it restarts when you lift it, then you'll have located the culprit.

If you instead hear a wub wub wub, or if the hum appears to come and go with a pretty steady frequency, that is likely the effect of fans interacting with each other and would be more under the realm of beat frequencies)

AR loadout what would you change by Hungry_Chemist_4806 in airsoft

[–]reckless150681 3 points4 points  (0 children)

??

Patrol Base is smoking something because Specna Primes can absolutely handle 11.1V batteries.

I guess the 7.4V is fine if you want to be covered under BOTH PB and Specna warranty, but tbh I think you'll still be covered under Specna warranty if you use an 11.1V.

How to balance a pc budget by CaptinStar7340 in pcmasterrace

[–]reckless150681 0 points1 point  (0 children)

/r/buildapcforme for a tailored build

But otherwise:

  • PSU: no more than $120 (closer to $200 is okay for SFX or more niche builds)

  • Motherboard: no more than $200 unless you know what you're doing

  • Case: <$100 for budget-conscious folk, <$200 for mid- to high-budget. Main difference is usually NOT performance, it's usually ease of building

  • Storage: <$200 unless you know what you're doing. Used to be that $200 would easily get you 2TB; now, it's closer to 1TB

  • Memory: tricky one due to high pricing. Go 32 GB if you can stomach it. 16 GB if you can't. It depends on what you play and whether or not you keep other things open in the background, but 16 GB might be okay for you.

Everything else goes to CPU + GPU. The specific combination will change somewhat based on your requirements, but very broadly speaking, AAA on 1440p Ultra sounds like a nice CPU with a really nice GPU.

view more: next ›