Announcement #Whatever: Speeding is Safe?

[Aldurin]

I have to say that Brian is on to something here . . . my only problem is that the gas mileage might not be good. (http://www.nuklearpower.com/2010/03/24/speeds-the-name-of-the-game/)

Discuss or something.

[Meister]

Counterargument: if your car is parked in Spot A for two hours there is a chance it may at some point within those two hours occupy the same space another car occupies, true. But if your car moves from A to B for two hours: granted this is just high school geometry, but I distincly remember that a line is made up of an infinite number of points, and thus your car will occupy an infinite number of points in the timespan of two hours. Assuming that for every point there's the same probability of a non-your car attempting to occupy it at some point within those two hours, the chance of your car colliding with a non-your car is exactly that probability as long as it's stationary, but if you move it it's that probability times infinite.

it's a miracle anyone ever gets somewhere at all, really.

[Green Spanner]

All these problems would be moot had we been given our flying cars LIKE WE WE WERE PROMISED!

Or maybe pogo-boots.

[Meister]

You'd have cars moving in a three-dimensional space. If a simple line has infinite points, just imagine how many more a 3D space must have, and how many opportunities for crashing that represents! I cannot support this madness.

No, the only way to be safe is to have only one car for the planet and a really good sharing plan.

[Green Spanner]

You'd have cars moving in a three-dimensional space. If a simple line has infinite points, just imagine how many more a 3D space must have, and how many opportunities for crashing that represents! I cannot support this madness.

No, the only way to be safe is to have only one car for the planet and a really good sharing plan.

Why not one flying car?

A really big flying car that can fit everybody in the world in it.

THERE IS LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE TO THIS PLAN.

[Aldurin]

Why not one flying car?

A really big flying car that can fit everybody in the world in it.

THERE IS LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE TO THIS PLAN.

Not even if some terrorists hijacked it and crashed it into the pyramids and killed everyone in the world, because our international coordination and defenses are too good to let that happen.

[Melfice]

You know, maybe we all should chip in and have Brian visit Germany some time.
Have him drive across the Autobahn.

I never have, nor will I in the foreseeable future, but I understand that this is a highly unnerving experience for somebody who never has done so before.
That said, maybe Brian is just such an awesome driver he has no problem with it, but y'know.

[Meister]

Driving across the Autobahn does sound like a very unnerving experience indeed.

[Aldurin]

Since this theory still has merit, I'll go ahead and test it out using one of my simulacra. That way none of you has to end up painting half a mile of a highway red.

[Amake]

Other counter-argument: Space and time are relative to each other. The space your vehicle occupies at any given time increases proportional to its velocity. Picture, if you will, a car moving at a relativistic* 50 m/h for one hour: If seen as a four-dimensional construct it becomes a kind of worm on wheels, stretching fifty miles. The likelihood of it intersecting with another car becomes enormous, and only returns to the apparent base value given by the size of the car when we remember that we do not in fact perceive time in four dimensions.

Better to trust in simple statistics. For example, almost no collisions occur at speeds exceeding 200 m/h. It must therefore be a safe speed.

*In the sense that all speeds are relativistic.

[Melfice]

Driving across the Autobahn does sound like a very unnerving experience indeed.

You just work on getting me my grandparents' bikes back.
Once you accomplish that, you can sass me.

[stefan]

no no no, you're all thinking smalltime.

the correct solution is to engineer a space/time distortion engine so that you can simply move the world so that your destination and your beginning occupy the same 4dimensional point.

[Aldurin]

I still like the idea of driving fast.

:rmage: Stickers increase your maximum speed.

:bmage: Tell me more

EDIT: It appears Meister has recognized me as the new guy to make threads for announcements given the locking of other threads that have tried to start discussions on this. Thanks. I won't let you down (I hope).

[Seil]

All these problems would be moot had we been given our flying cars LIKE WE WE WERE PROMISED!

Cracked has proven that to be a stupid idea. (http://www.cracked.com/article_15655_5-awesome-sci-fi-inventions-that-would-actually-suck.html)

[Aldurin]

I still want a flying car. And the holodeck.

[Meister]

EDIT: It appears Meister has recognized me as the new guy to make threads for announcements given the locking of other threads that have tried to start discussions on this.
That's a very big and not entirely justified assumption.

[Amake]

Bah. Why would you drive a car in New York City, or any big city? Especially a flying car.

The key to enjoy flying is to do it where there aren't any people or anything to collide with. Like, say, the Atlantic.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Counter argument: Going faster increases your mass- thus you occupy a larger space and thus collide more often.

[Meister]

Okay.

When you want to go somewhere you program your flying car with a start and an end point of the journey. The onboard computer of every flying car is linked to a database of routes, so when you program a new route it'll be calculated such that it doesn't cross any other car's routes at any point. And that's the collision problem done for. (Only works with flying cars, it wouldn't work if you were confined to roads.)

Possible disadvantage: you have to get in early on the flying car craze to get good routes. After 20 years or so the only routes from Point Your House to Point Grocery Store left will have to go via Argentina and the North Pole, and you'll have to pack a huge jerry can.

[Aldurin]

That's a very big and not entirely justified assumption.

Never mind then.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Not even if some terrorists hijacked it and crashed it into the pyramids and killed everyone in the world, because our international coordination and defenses are too good to let that happen.

That's so silly I can't even begin to comprehend it.

For one thing, where would they get pyramids after everything on Earth has been converted into raw materials for the super ultra mega hyper death car?

[Aldurin]

The big question are you gonna have to reinvent regular cars so you can get around in the giant flying one? So our problem would start all over again and keep going until armaggedon or when we invent holodecks.

[jaimehlers]

Okay, here's the obligatory fan version: "Brian shouldn't go too fast because if he did and something happened then he would no longer be able to produce enjoyable comics for people to read."

The more physics-ish version: "While moving at a faster speed means that there is less of a chance of another object moving into the space one occupies at any particular moment, it increases the chance of moving into the space another object occupies. In addition, the faster an object is going, the more destructive a collision tends to be; inertia is mass times velocity, so a higher velocity imparts more inertia and thus necessitates the release of more energy should two objects attempt to occupy the same space at the same time."

The TLDR version: "Going faster makes it more likely to hit something, less likely to react in time, and more likely to do increased damage when an impact happens."

[rpgdemon]

Okay, here's the obligatory fan version: "Brian shouldn't go too fast because if he did and something happened then he would no longer be able to produce enjoyable comics for people to read."

The more physics-ish version: "While moving at a faster speed means that there is less of a chance of another object moving into the space one occupies at any particular moment, it increases the chance of moving into the space another object occupies. In addition, the faster an object is going, the more destructive a collision tends to be; inertia is mass times velocity, so a higher velocity imparts more inertia and thus necessitates the release of more energy should two objects attempt to occupy the same space at the same time."

The TLDR version: "Going faster makes it more likely to hit something, less likely to react in time, and more likely to do increased damage when an impact happens."

That's momentum, not inertia. :P