The moon in risk of rain 2 is in an impossible positon and Ill prove it
(I originally intended to calculate the amount of goat hooves it would take to reach the moon, this proved fruitless)
The moon in risk of rain 2 is in an impossible positon and Ill prove it
James Barnes
Other urls found in this thread:
pnas.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Brayden Reyes
First I measured the angle the player can look using the artifact world as it had neat straight lines. I looked up as much as I could, lined it up so it was perpendicular with a straight line, and spawned a turret. I did the same for looking down, spawning 2 turrets, one where I stood, and one where my cursor landed. I then added these angles up to get 139 degree view angle.
Isaiah Bell
Next I used a controller, and set the sensitivity and horizontal look speed to minimum. I measured the time to look completely up and completely down. I did this more than once and averaged them to get 32.75 seconds. (this is averaged out over many)
Robert Reed
Next I measured how long it took to look at the diameter of the moon. I compared the this time to the 32.75 seconds and 139 degrees. The moon came out to be at a 83.33 degree angle.
Dominic Lewis
Next I determined the size of objects so I could measure the graviational acceleration. For that I used the artifact world. I used pings to measure the distance between two lines, using a stone golem at the end of the block as an "anchor". I did this many times and averaged it out. I got 36.47m (the 2 lines are 2 cut into the block, not the distance to the golem)
Blake Perez
Couldn't you just extract the map and see the moon isn't in a place you can reach
Lucas Sanders
With this measurement I measured the beetle queen then the stone titan in relation to the lines, using pixel measurements. The beetle queen came to be 17.857m and the stone titan came to be 18.005m
I then measured a box in Rallypoint Delta in relation to the stone titan and got 21.99m.
Jackson Jones
I will prove the moon should be colliding with the planet
I got the help of another user, and had them fall off the crate while I recorded. I used this recording and lined up a grid with 10 equal squares (easier to measure distance). I then measured the change in velocity, using the grid to find distance, and a frame by frame to find time. I got the gravitational acceleration as 20.613 m/s squared
Parker Baker
fascinating op
Leo Myers
I love your autism. Continue.
Ayden Stewart
its just a jpg in the skybox, calm down
t.Happo intern
John Carter
i wish i had your autism op
i dont care about anything
Charles Cook
With this number I found the minimum and maximum size of the planet.
I compared the gravitational acceleration equation,solving for mass, with the density equation, also solving for mass. To compensate for the radius, instead of volume, used in the equation I plugged in the volume formula for a radius.
I used the density equation as I could give a maximum density the planet could be. I used the average of iron and iron-nickel, 8,000kg/m3, as a planet with this density would be mostly metal, and would be inhospitable.
That gave a minimum radius of 9216609.748034 meters.
Josiah Wright
The maximum size of the planet is very easy. A terrestrial planet cannot be more than 2 earth radius, as at that point the planet would form into a gas planet. pnas.org
Michael Brooks
Next I measured how far above the center of the moon is compared to the horizon. I subtracted the time to look 65 degrees (so it would be a straight line)
this came to be 10.08 degrees.
Eli Bennett
With the moon angle measurements, the angle measuremnts in relation to the horizon, the minimum and maximum radius of the planet, and the knowledge a rocky planet (in this case moon) cannot be more than double the earth radius, I made simple triangles. I used many different moon sizes, ranging from the maximum, all the way to the minimum radius a celestial object can be and still be spherical. (300km)
Jaxson Gonzalez
Autismo. It's just a skybox not an actual mesh with pathing on it. Do you understand what that means? You can't walk on it. Even if it was a pseudo mesh superimposed on a 2d skybox, you STILL can't walk on it because again no pathing, assuming you somehow land anywhere near the actual "mesh" it will not change size and you'll just clip through it.
Justin Martinez
Fuck off fag. OP is actually talking about something that isn't coomer related
Cooper Stewart
I also graphed the sizes to make it easier to see, that it is indeed impossible as the moon would be inside the planet. (the green is the minimum and maximum size of the planet) (the blues are the moon sizes ranging from minimum to maximum.)
Elijah Johnson
Is not talking about masturbation a point of pride for you?
Parker Jenkins
This isnt relevant to the original topic, but I wanted to share. While measuring the distances for each character, I found out loader's utilty decreases distance with more goat hooves. I will post the webm in segments (file size limits)
Ian Roberts
>rainstorm
Robert Howard
Thomas Johnson
It's good to see a thread about VIDEO GAMES on a VIDEO GAME BOARD and not PORN on a VIDEO GAME BOARD. Go to gif you coomer
Michael Sanders
Carson Ward
Complete gibberish. Even if anyone would take your argument seriously the problem herein lies with the assumed values for mass and density. It's operating on an assumption based on a false paradigm, you do not have the concrete data on any of these values so it's just elaborate formulaec calculations based on a false scenario you've constructed to suit it, in the scientific field this is called fraud. Apply yourself to something more authentic and empirically just instead.
Asher Hughes
Now this is some useless data, good job OP. I'm serious.
Oliver Miller
Adrian Fisher
no one was even talking about porn before you you fucking retard
Daniel Adams
en.wikipedia.org
I put 8000kg/m3 as an extreme. no terrestrial planets I could find went over this amount
Jeremiah Kelly
>en.wikipedia.org
Absurd. You seriously think this is a good approximation when we literally can't even establish if it's a mesh or not to begin with. You might as well go "Planet BIG is far~" and you'll come up just as accurate. No, sorry but this is an entertaining idea at best and completely flawed reasoning from the start. Here's an idea, contact the developer and establish causality, one that can be quantified in concrete terms, then we can talk. There is a big difference between making an educated guess, that you can't even verify, rather than having concrete evidence as a constant point.
Nathan Morgan
Do you have any brain cells in your head, or are you just pretending to be this retarded?