Whewell proposed the word again more seriously (and not anonymously) in his 1840[31] The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences:
The terminations ize (rather than ise), ism, and ist, are applied to words of all origins: thus we have to pulverize, to colonize, Witticism, Heathenism, Journalist, Tobacconist. Hence we may make such words when they are wanted. As we cannot use physician for a cultivator of physics, I have called him a Physicist. We need very much a name to describe a cultivator of science in general. I should incline to call him a Scientist. Thus we might say, that as an Artist is a Musician, Painter, or Poet, a Scientist is a Mathematician, Physicist, or Naturalist.
I found it interesting to learn “Scientist” is such a new word though! I assumed it was some ancient word, not something some guy just sat down and came up with pretty recently
Srinivasa Ramanujan was an Indian mathematician who worked on number theory, infinite series and analysis. He said that he would have dreams of drops of blood (a symbol of his village deity, the goddess Namagiri Thayar), followed by complex mathematical equations. Even with the help of his formally-trained friend GH Hardy, he was only able to prove a small fraction of his insights.
Gregori Perelman is a Russian mathematician best known for solving the Poincare conjecture. He posted his results on arXiv in 2002-03, but never published them in a journal and never accepted any prize or money. He has expressed dismay over the lack of ethics in research.
Anon is a /sci/ user who in 2011 proved the current lower bound of a superpermutation for any size greater than 2 (the Haruhi Problem). Their proof has been archived for posterity, but we don’t know anything more about them.
He said that he would have dreams of drops of blood (a symbol of his village deity, the goddess Namagiri Thayar), followed by complex mathematical equations. Even with the help of his formally-trained friend GH Hardy, he was only able to prove a small fraction of his insights.
“It came to me in a dream and I forgot it in another dream”
Those are riding boots, or dress boots. They also make Western style boots with rugged soles for work. I have a pair and they’re outstanding on all terrain, including snow. Here’s an example:
I got them because we decided not to wear shoes inside our house, and unlacing my work boots several times per day was a real PITA. These take about two seconds to take off or put on.
And the leather soles get mushy...and the salt used to melt the ice absolutely shreds the leather just above the stitching when it dries out. Western boots suck in the snow, and it's a quick way to ruin them. Even rubber-soled ones like some of Ariat's don't last, but they're better on wet surfaces.
Hmm, interesting indeed! I get what you’re trying to say, but I would also tend to believe that it’s still the same animal? If not that, then wouldn’t the caterpillar cease to exist when it metamorphosised into something else?
“Caterpillar” is not a species. It’s a stage of some animals’ life cycle. It means 99% of catepillars die before they become butterflies or moths or whatever
I wish it were 100% in tomato hornworms. Seeing that 99% of them die before turning into moths makes me think all of the surviving ones just hang out in my garden.
For some reason people seem to think they’re fundamentally smarter than people were back then.
Yeah, you may have technically had a better education, but you’re not inherently more intelligent than the average person back then, and a genius from that time is still miles ahead of you.
Yeah, it’s been linked to systemic racist thought patterns (which are often unintentional but should be acknowledged). I explain it to people like this: take a handful of sand and turn your fist so that your palm faces perpendicular to the ground. Now release the sand slowly… What shape does it form? It isn’t rocket science.
Pyramids = basic engineering shape for a sturdy structure. Wide base, tapered top. A lot of early monumental structures were constructed with that basic concept in mind.
Ancient aliens literally has Nazi origins. They didn’t just have race-science, but race-history. I guess you could call their thinking ancient-Aryans because they believed that impressive structures built by brown people must have been led by a Northern European diaspora who eventually vanished because of race-mixing.
You can watch the History channel all you want, but nobody is going to question the Parthenon or the Colosseum. Stonehenge is the only one I can think of where Aliens had to help white people.
Yeah, and it is hard for many people to see the direct correlation of “Chariot of the Gods” etc. with Nazis because it isn’t hitting them in the face. I try to show people that people were smart back then, too, instead of punishing these icky mindsets because they tend to be a bit reactionary anyway. Some people just don’t know any better for a variety of reasons.
The two things you named were built thousands of years after the pyramids are believed to have been built though. You said it yourself, people think aliens helped with Stonehenge. That’s because it’s much older and there is no written history from when it was built.
I don’t doubt racism is factor in all sorts of aspects in life but this seems like a massive fucking stretch. Maybe come up with better examples.
Pseudoarchaeology has a pretty long and not-so-awesome background due to the profession’s colonial roots with treasure hunters, adventurers, and the like, especially in antiquarian circles.
In the late 18th to 19th century archaeology became a national endeavor as personal cabinets of curios turned into national museums. People were now being hired to go out and collect artifacts to make a nation’s collection more grand and to show how far a nation’s reach extends. For example, Giovanni Battista Belzoni was hired by Henry Salt, the British consul to Egypt, to gather antiquities for Britain. In nineteenth-century Mexico, the expansion of the National Museum of Anthropology and the excavation of major archaeological ruins by Leopoldo Batres were part of the liberal regime of Porfirio Díaz to create a glorious image of Mexico’s pre-Hispanic past.[22]
So that’s great evidence for racism being in archeology in general but I still don’t see the connection between that and people crediting aliens for things we don’t completely understand.
Edit: There are definitely good examples in the article but they also use your argument about things that were built way more recently compared to things that were built before written language. Egyptians definitely built the pyramids, they’re in Egypt so by definition that’s what happened. But I really don’t believe people getting excited over the mystery around how it happened and then pointing to aliens as a possible answer is rooted in racism at all. That being said, there seems be all sorts of nefarious reasons to put that alien explanation on things that are much easier explained without aliens.
He also had a history of being screwed by people. The guy did a lot of good work, and arguably his attempt at patenting it was instrumental in preventing it from being patented. I don’t think that was his intention, but good came from it.
The only reason people don’t like it is because they haven’t tried it. I was a holdout for the longest time. Fun fact: Hawaiian pizza was invented in Canada by a Greek man.
Fun fact: IDK about like a backyard vegetable garden, but small family-sized farms are actually more productive per unit of land than big industrial agriculture.
The farming conglomerates like to enforce big farming operations because they make things easier for the managerial class, and let them be in charge of everything. But if your goal is just to produce food and have the farmers make a living, small farms are actually better even economically (and not just for like 10 other reasons).
Aragón conducted a study on farm productivity of more than 4,000 farming households in Uganda over a five-year period. The study considered farm productivity based on land, labour and tools as well as yields per unit area of cultivated land. His findings suggested that even though yields were higher for smaller farms, farm productivity was actually higher for larger farms. Similar research in Peru, Tanzania and Bangladesh supported these findings.
What explains these divergent findings? Answering this question is important given its consequential policy implications. If small farms are indeed more productive, then policies that encourage small landholdings (such as land redistribution) could increase aggregate productivity (see the discussion in Collier and Dercon, 2014).
We argue that these divergent results reflect the limitation of using yields as a measure of productivity. Our contribution is to show that, in many empirical applications, yields are not informative of the size-productivity relationship, and can lead to qualitatively different insights. Our findings cast doubts on the interpretation of the inverse yield-size relationship as evidence that small farms are more productive, and stress the need to revisit the existing empirical evidence.
Meaning the author is advocating for more scrutiny against the claim and against land redistribution as a policy stance with the intention of increasing productivity.
First, farmers have small scale operations (the average cultivated area is 2.3 hectares).
The definition of “small family farms” in this case is on average more than 5 acres, which would absolutely be under the umbrella of subsidized industrial agriculture in developed nations.
Yeah, that's why I included "per unit of land." It is in practice a little more complex, and a lot of times the smaller farms are more labor-intensive.
My opinion is that modern farming is efficient enough that we can very obviously sustain the farmer, and sell the food at a reasonable price, and it all works -- the only reason this is even complicated at all and we have to talk about optimizing for labor (certainly in 1st-world farms) is that we're trying to support a bloodsucking managerial class that demands six-figure salaries for doing fuck-all, and subsistence wages for the farmers and less than that for farmworkers, and stockholder dividends, and people making fortunes from international trade; and if we just fixed all that bullshit then the issue would be land productivity and everything would be fine.
But yes, in terms of labor productivity it's a little more complex, and none of the above system I listed is likely to change anytime soon, so that's fair.
My god it’s like they’re deliberately trying to make their paper unintelligible to other humans. If I am reading this paper correctly, it is in line with other research on the topic, by indicating that smaller farms tend to have higher yields due to greater labor inputs. While I’m sure an economist would think this puts the issue to rest, being able to feed more people on a smaller land area might still be beneficial even if it requires more labor. Economists often assume that the economy represents the ideal allocation of resources, but I reject this assumption.
By the way, 5 acres is minuscule compared to conventional agriculture, at least in the US. So these aren’t backyard gardens but they are likely quite different from agribusiness as well.
If you think 5 acres on average isn’t subsidized or industrialized then I challenge you to try it out of your own pocket: fertilize with shovels, till with a hoe, water and pest control without anything but hand pumps or windmills, reap the harvest with a scythe.
I don’t know why you’re assuming small farms need to be worked with medieval technology—that’s not what I’m saying at all. What I am saying is that 5 acre farms are far smaller than typical for modern agribusiness, and the differences in management are enormous. And I’ve actually worked on a farm that was 8 acres and we did much (though not all) of the labor by hand.
The average US farm is just under 500 acres. It’s totally different to grow food on that scale.
We do all by hand on a 1/2 acre of mixed veg. We feed our family of five and sell our extras. All the work is done by two adults. 5 acres would be insane and we are hard workers. I can’t imagine that size without a tractor.
Wait, 5 acres wouldn’t be all vegetables! Fruit trees, grains, grassland all spread in time so you can work on them when your vegetables don’t need attention.
Also, you can’t just look at the amount of food produced, but the amount produced vs waste, storage and transportation costs. Most things in the garden can stay ripe on the plant for a while and can be picked as needed.
Anecdotally, we were supplying about 80% of our fruit and veg needs on our own garden plot on our standard city residential lot with a family of 7. And we were literally giving tomatoes, citrus and zucchini away as fast as we could.
It’s neat seeing someone learn about Mt St Helen’s for the first time. It was such a big deal in the 80s that I can’t remember not knowing about it. It makes me excited to discover major events I know nothing about…
Anyway… The thing with it wasn’t necessarily the size of the eruption. There have been much, much bigger eruptions. It’s that it was one of the first with really good footage (since it was one of the earlier predicted eruptions), it occurred in the US, and it blew out sideways instead of the top.
Haha, yea, I wasn’t born in the right decade on the right continent to know about this, so I had a really good time learning about something new!
The only reason I even know about the Yellowstone caldera eruption zone is because my American cousin once told me about it in the form of a horror story when we were both younger, and I started crying because I thought the world was going to end while we were visiting Connecticut, lol.
Mt, St. Helen compared to Yellowstone or the Phlegraean Fields in Italy was an a simple New Year’s Eve rocket. Both capable to create an month long night on the whole Earth.
The Yellowstone volcano is about 8 times larger than the entirety of park that has Mt St Helens in it (~860,000 acres of volcano vs ~110,000 acres of park).
That would definitely explain why it’s sped up if the source was a bunch of still images. I’ve seen other edits of it that look a little more like a real-time video.
Notice how they don’t have that nice big pretty volcano cone shape? It just looks like some drunk geologists scribbled on a map and drew circles around a low lying area with a lake or two in it and called it a “volcano” or a “volcanic zone”.
The reason though is that the BIGGEST and most destructive volcanic eruptions tend to happen with lava/magma that doesn’t flow very well and like when you get a stuffed nose, everything gets blocked up. Like many of us, these volcanos don’t solve the problem and go take a decongestant or blow their nose, they just sit there sniveling and stewing, failing to release the pressure that keeps building and building and building.
These eruptions are called felsic eruptions (the opposite of mafic, goopy eruptions you have seen footage of from Hawaii where the lava comes out like a fluid). An immense amount of gas is released by magma as it becomes exposed to the surface (which then we call it “lava”) as the gas is no longer kept in the magma at immense pressures. The magma can’t flow and “pass the gas” so to speak so a plug forms and what you get is a terrifyingly big pressure cooker that just builds and builds like that person on the plane next to you that just keeps sniffing and sniffing and never blowing their nose.
When the built up pressure finally overcomes the plug, the resulting explosion is so catastrophic it doesn’t leave a clean volcano shape. What you are left with is an uneven low topography dotted with lakes that marks the site of an incomprehensibly large explosion, hence the topography of Yellowstone, Wyoming and the Taupo Volcanic Zone on the North Island of New Zealand.
TIME FOR SOME STATS THAT WILL BREAK YOUR BRAIN
"The Taupō Volcanic Zone has produced in the last 350,000 years over 3,900 cubic kilometres (940 cu mi) material, more than anywhere else on Earth, from over 300 silicic eruptions [my edit: “Felsic” means “has lots of silica/silicic (silicic? seriously wikipedia?) and wants to form minerals high in silica like quartz and feldspar”], with 12 of these eruptions being caldera-forming. Detailed stratigraphy in the zone is only available from the Ōkataina Rotoiti eruption but including this event, the zone has been more productive than any other rhyolite predominant volcanic area [my edit: Rhyolite is a record of catastrophe, it is a Felsic, silica-rich igneous rock like Granite except it cooled FAST at the surface instead of in big underground “batholiths” (that make up a good portion of the Canadian Shield and the NE of the US among other places) where the minerals had time to grow into big pretty crystals, same ingredients as Granite but with much more exciting baking instructions] over the last 50,000 odd years at 12.8 km3 (3.1 cu mi) per thousand years. Comparison of large events in the Taupō volcanic zone over the last 1.6 million years at 3.8 km3 (0.91 cu mi) per thousand years versus with Yellowstone Caldera’s 2.1 million year productivity at 3.0 km3 (0.72 cu mi) per thousand years favours Taupo…
…The last major eruption from Lake Taupō, the Hatepe eruption, occurred in 232 CE. It is believed to have first emptied the lake, then followed that feat with a pyroclastic flow that covered about 20,000 km2 (7,700 sq mi) of land with volcanic ash. A total of 120 km3 (29 cu mi) of material expressed as dense-rock equivalent (DRE) is believed to have been ejected, and over 30 km3 (7.2 cu mi) of material is estimated to have been ejected in just a few minutes."…
…“The main extremely violent pyroclastic flow travelled at close to the speed of sound and devastated the surrounding area, climbing over 1,500 m (4,900 ft) to overtop the nearby Kaimanawa Ranges and Mount Tongariro, and covering the land within 80 km (50 mi) with ignimbrite [my edit: the name for pyroclastic flow deposits, i.e. pumice and ash, that kind of thing]. Only Ruapehu was high enough to divert the flow. The power of the pyroclastic flow was so strong that in some places it eroded more material off the ground surface than it replaced with ignimbrite. There is evidence that it occurred on an autumn afternoon and its energy release was about 150 megatons of TNT equivalent. The eruption column penetrated the stratosphere as revealed by deposits in ice core samples in Greenland and Antarctica.”
So you’re saying we need to cover Wyoming in cement. Gotcha.
I am sure if you sold it to Wyoming voters as a way to hurt trans people AND immigrants at the same time they would happily vote for it and drown themselves alive in a sea of concrete.
Ohhh, I had no idea there were different kinds of volcanoes but it does make sense in hindsight.
Well, I guess this might have been covered in primary or secondary education at some point but it’s been about 3000 years since my last geography class
yo geolooggggyyyyyyy (lots of good brain food I promise)___ There is a wonderful diverse world of volcanic eruptions! One thing you might not have thought about is how glaciers often form at the top of large cone volcanoes and the way the lava erupting interacts with a large volume of ice can shape the eruption significantly. One of the biggest results are lahars, like muddy, liquidy avalanches but even faster and deadlier. usgs.gov/…/d-claw-computer-simulation-landslide-b…usgs.gov/…/lahars-move-rapidly-down-valleys-river…To give you a good point of reference though, one thing that links all volcanic eruptions and is a good axis for comparison between different eruptions and volcanoes is that all magma pretty much comes up from the interior of the earth to the near surface starting at the same chemical composition (called “mafic” it sounds like “basic”). Mafic minerals are heavy, dense and tend to be dark colored when viewed in a hand specimen, a common mafic rock is Basalt. Most of the oceanic crust is basalt. https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/593a6765-e3c6-4280-91e5-6971db9e8eeb.webpAvailable Wherever You Get Your Bottoms Of OceansFelsic minerals tend to be light both in mass and in coloring, a comon felsic rock is Granite. https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/1fbf7496-2513-4916-a2b3-999567602144.webpLooks like your mom’s countertop, I remember it well how perfectly the skin of her naked legs complemented the gorgeously polished crystal textures of quartz, potassium feldspar (K-feldspar), sodic plagioclase feldspar, hornblende amphibole, and micaThis is a graph of Viscosity, the more Viscous the Magma the less ability it has to flow like a liquid (and thus the more likely a plug is likely to form inside a volcano). It is also more difficult for lower temperature magma to flow, and Felsic lava is almost always lower temperature (cooling had to occur to become Felsic in the first place so). https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/f76404f8-1cc8-46f7-80e4-cd1168a09a64.webpen.wikipedia.org/wiki/MagmaHere is something to ground these two ends of what probably seems like an arbitrary spectrum to focus on, the Oceanic Crust (i.e. the bottom of the ocean) on this planet is overwhelmingly made up of mafic rocks (i.e. Basalt) and large amounts of felsic rocks only really form on continental plates where there is the space and depth of rock to house massive chambers of magma, especially since Oceanic Plates are always getting subducted and recycled unlike Continental Plates (and thus the magma might be subducted & recycled before it could even begin the process of becoming significantly felsic). This axis of chemistry is critical to Geologists because it points directly to some of the biggest trends of geology on the planet and a related fact I might as well drop here is that because of these dynamics Continental Plates (i.e. basically the continents) can be orders of magnitude older (on the order of 1 billion years or older, the earth is only 4 or so billion years old) than oceanic crust which tends to be younger than 200 million years old (and often is much younger). On Continental Plates if magma feeds into large underground chambers (batholiths) and is allowed to cool slowly then certain minerals will begin to form and precipitate out like snow that layers up on the bottom of the chamber. The specifics of what minerals these are depends on how long, how hot, how much pressure and other factors but you can vaguely think of it as a process of distillation where magma progresses from the original “mafic” composition to a “felsic” one as the high temperature mafic minerals crystallize out leaving behind the felsic magma mixture. The felsic minerals don’t crystallize out until the magma has significantly cooled and thus if the magma undergoing this process in a chamber is integrated into an eruption, it can become extremely explosive and destructive. https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/65721ae8-6550-4b8c-979b-640acba4a239.webpopentextbc.ca/…/4-2-magma-composition-and-eruptio…https://sopuli.xyz/pictrs/image/b01940fc-eaf4-4f2f-9380-2ebeb718a7b1.webpHalf Dome in Yosemite California is such a trip because it is so clearly what we imagine in geology when we talk about a really big underground chamber of magma (after it has cooled into rock obv), Half Dome just looks like exactly how you would imagine it if you dug up an old magma chamber and cracked in half with a suitably large hammer-----------------
Thank you that was super informative. Is there anything that can be done to mitigate an impending eruption? Ive always heard that if one of the big super volcanoes goes it could be quite catastrophic for the entire world. Surely theres been some research into like pressure relief holes or something…antacid tabs?
Surely theres been some research into like pressure relief holes or something…antacid tabs?
I am sure there are lots of geologists who have thought of it, it makes sense right?
The problem is that nobody gives a shit about listening to geologists unless they are talking about where to find oil. Even if a geoengineering project of this scale and magnitude (with such catastrophic consequences if it goes wrong) where possible with near current geological science and hardware this degree of interest and investment of society is only ever committed to visions techbros provide and I don’t think a single techbro has ever taken a geology class and actually remotely paid attention.
It was geologists in the 1970s who first pointed out the obvious connection between human released CO2 emissions and global warming.
Nobody gave a shit :)
(plenty of complicit geologists who made a veryyyyy good living too don’t get me wrong)
We are just weirdos going on about rocks except when those rocks are really valuable and provide the capacity to create empires but even in those cases we are never really part of that, we are always still the weirdos going on about rocks who everybody is like “ok but can you shut up now and point to the gold on the map?”.
I know it is a weird example but look at the landscapes of virtual environments, video game developers have been trying to craft evocative landscapes since the beginning of video games even before 3D engines, you would think that some of them might have been interested to find inspiration for world design from the dizzying variety of landforms and stories described in geology (that are perfect to engage a player with because geological landscapes are layered stories first and foremost).
From the perspective of a geologist, it is obvious for game developers to make world building tools that allow molding an entire mountain range for an open world rpg by first starting with two continents and smashing them together with your mouse over and over again until it made a compelling starting point (instead of just making every damn mountain by hand or just writing a dumb algorithm to randomly generate mountains) and then running a massive river through the mountains for 10 million years to create the main valley for the game.
Todd Howard released a screenshot of the next Elder Scrolls Game
the story here was there was a river and then a mountain range came in (some new kid named Appalachians) and was like “sorry dude” but then the Delaware River was like “I am literally going nowhere bro, put your silly mountains wherever you want and I will cut you down when you get in my way”. This friendly conversation has been going on for 400-500 million years, which is about 1/8 of the earth’s history (the earth was a hot mess for the 1st billion so that barely counts). A lot of rivers are pretty lazy, but not the Delaware River, you gotta give it credit.
A geological sandbox for large scale world design that allowed game developers to quickly and intuitively create landscapes with layered pasts and local variety that perennially inspired curiosity from players seems so obvious to me it is painful. (Also as a fun toy for its own sake).
Like damn… video games barely know how to make a rock outcrop look natural and it is 2024… ——
All that being said to point out that your vision of a cool geo-engineering project is mostly unrealistic because of humans not even bringing geology into the picture. Part of the globalized contagion of late-stage capitalism is VERY crucially a collective forgetting of the stories in the landscapes around us. We have been taught to see the landscape around us as a background for our genius, not the primary gift passed down by our ancestors, the foundation of all the beauty in our lives and a fascinating machine of anarchy that creates endless forms of order.
Everywhere all over the world people are extracting groundwater at a ridiculously unsustainable rate (the fucking AXIS EARTH IS TILTED ON has changed because so much groundwater has been extracted) even while geologists try to point out there is going to be no clean water left???, the dysfunction of our thinking with respect to land goes very deep unfortunately.
Instead we are left with this trash Elon Musk-esque obsession with spiritually disconnecting ourselves from Earth and leaving for Mars as if the idea of separating us from the landscape (and natural systems/biosphere) we evolved in makes any sense at a basic level of our body maintaining homeostasis effectively or is something we would even desire to do (thanks for that one, sci-fi shows and books!). It is like plucking an ant from an ant colony, carefully placing it into the ocean and whispering “now you can start a new life here”…… It makes no sense.
On the game side of things, while i agree more realistic landscapes would be awesome, making games is really hard work and you need to be careful where you’ll invest your time in if you want to actually get anything finished. The truth is most people who are not geologists can’t tell the difference between a realistic landscape and an unrealistic one.
We have some tools for world generation, though i’m not sure how realistic they are. Mostly a mix of noise functions (Simplex, Perlin, etc) and erosion simulation. But i barely understand how that works, so your “geological sandbox” seems a lot less obvious to me.
Another thing to consider is that in game design, realism will always take a backseat for good gameplay. A map that naturally guides the players where they need to go is usually much more desirable than one that is realistic but unintuitive. Plus when you add magic, gods, or even enough sci-fi, the bar for what counts as a realistic landscape really goes out the window anyway.
Another thing to consider is that in game design, realism will always take a backseat for good gameplay. A map that naturally guides the players where they need to go is usually much more desirable than one that is realistic but unintuitive. Plus when you add magic, gods, or even enough sci-fi, the bar for what counts as a realistic landscape really goes out the window anyway.
Why would a map that reflected natural landscapes be more unintuitive than an awkwardly fabricated one that doesn’t reflect any landscape a person has seen looks like?
sigh and I am really trying not to come off like I am claiming everything has to be realistic to the stupid little details only a geologist would know.
…but also if natural landscapes ARE unintuitive to most people now, doesn’t that feel like an existential crisis to you? Shouldn’t game developers seek us to reconnect our intuition with natural landscapes to try to heal that awful severance of our soul?
My point was that building landscapes to tell stories in without building the landscape as a story too is a silly thing to do, both for immersion of the player and for overall work.
There is no reason a sort of clay like modeling simulator couldn’t give you an artistically conveyed sense of two continental plates colliding, and if the tools were playful and immediate to use (like I pointed out, just being able to smash continents together by clicking and dragging them in different directions at each other like Besieged but for geology) it would be easier for world designers overwhelmed by a blank canvas to start because their canvas already has a story rather than suffocating blank space.
Why would a map that reflected natural landscapes be more unintuitive than an awkwardly fabricated one that doesn’t reflect any landscape a person has seen looks like?
Mountain ranges blocking off high level areas, terrain elevation being changed to make sure certain landmarks are more visible/look better on camera, resources such as water/ores, etc needing to be close together for balancing reasons (For survival/crafting games), etc. Reality doesn’t always conform with one’s artistic vision.
There is no reason a sort of clay like modeling simulator couldn’t give you an artistically conveyed sense of two continental plates colliding, and if the tools were playful and immediate to use (like I pointed out, just being able to smash continents together by clicking and dragging them in different directions at each other like Besieged but for geology) it would be easier for world designers overwhelmed by a blank canvas to start because their canvas already has a story rather than suffocating blank space.
And my point is that shit is hard to make, doesn’t scale well with large maps (simulating the plates colliding like you said costs memory and processing power), and wouldn’t find an audience because most people can’t tell/don’t care about the difference.
Look, i’m sorry if i came out as rude, i know you don’t mean that every single little detail must be correct just to please you, i get it. My main gripe with your comment is just the “This is so obvious! Why hasn’t anyone made this?” attitude. Because it ignores the work that needs to go into each of these tools, often for almost no recognition/compensation.
My main gripe with your comment is just the “This is so obvious! Why hasn’t anyone made this?” attitude. Because it ignores the work that needs to go into each of these tools, often for almost no recognition/compensation.
It is obvious, and you still aren’t seeing it. You keep misidentifying the main thing I point out as the beginning of the creative process and a catalyst to seeding inspiration for level and world design as an arbitrary complicated ask that has nothing to do with the experience of level designers engaging in the creative process nor how organic and engaging a landscape feels in the end product.
It’s like, an axiom to this conversation is that the knowledge I have of geology must mean MORE work for game designers and that gives you a right to portray me as having a snarky, unappreciative attitude towards the incredible amount of work that goes into video game development.
It honestly portrays that lack of interest in geology well, you almost seem annoyed that I would suggest geology contains anything that might be of use to video game development because it involves learning about something other than computers and computers are already hard enough.
I didn’t make the computers too hard to fit anything else in your brain, I also constantly give mad props to my favorite video game designers especially indie ones and ESPECIALLY open source projects with loving communities or developers who have maintained wonderful games for years and years.
…but yes… this whole landscape thing? It is obvious as fuck to a geologist, I’m sorry but it is. Treating open world design like it is this thing you have to build entirely by hand or with awkward algorithms that attempt to procedurally generate some unsettling landscape that has to be fixed by hand JUST as much one like this
Mountain ranges blocking off high level areas, terrain elevation being changed to make sure certain landmarks are more visible/look better on camera, resources such as water/ores, etc needing to be close together for balancing reasons (For survival/crafting games), etc. Reality doesn’t always conform with one’s artistic vision.
Procedural generation has to be hemmed in by guard rails, Minecraft doesn’t just generate ores willy bully with no thought or check for game balance? No procedurally generated game worth its salt does and there are innumerable successful examples of those. Why would it be any different for building worlds with geologically inspired tools in a fashion I describe?
I don’t understand why you see a difference there.
These processes also don’t have to be extremely advanced geophysical simulations, you can abstract shit into elegant systems that reflect deep complexity, it is called good game design.
You are right sadly :( but dont discredit yourself so much! A ton of people do listen and a ton of people think yall are cool! I think you’re cool. Its just that those people and I dont tend to be the people that have the resource to make decisions
Except Vesuvius, which looks like a volcano, but in 79CE erupted violently sending lave, magma and molten rocks several kilometers away, exactly like the stuffy nose you described. It completely destroyed Pompeii and Herculaneum, burying them for thousands of years.
Still nothing when compared to the destruction that the “Campi Flegrei” volcano brought 37’000 years ago, completely burying a huge section of the Campanian coastline.
Aain I love how it looks like a drunk geologist made a big scribble on a map and said before passing out “that Campi Flegrei, that’s a BIG one right there!” and you are just left looking at the map being like… what… are you sure that just looks like you randomly circled a huge part of the landscape?..like… really the whole bay?
Yeah, it pretty much blew out that whole section of coastline, that big hole is called a “caldera”. It’s still active btw, you can go and check it out if you want. Look for Solfatara di Pozzuoli.
You can also look at the Greek island of Santorini, where the whole western and central part of the island was blown off during the bronze age iirc. Historians speculate the eruption, earthquake and tsunamis caused by the event could have partially influenced the collapse of the Minoan civilization, the rise of the Mycenaeans, turmoil in Egypt and possibly even the fall of the Chinese empire due to a global winter. Crazy stuff
Are we just a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists sitting in dark rooms with a computer and pinboard against the wall, complete with strings between posted mugshots of lava domes and dikes, muttering to ourselves as we circle vaguely roundish things on a map in red ink and exclaim “ANOTHER!!!” ??
No, we are usually in the middle of nowhere in the woods hiking erratically across the landscape with nobody around so we tend to shout at things more than mutter because why not.
Yeah and slightly off topic wasn’t the pic of Helens blowing its top taken by a man who knew in advance the explosion would kill him and protected his film? Am i thinking of the right story?
Such a simple but beautiful act of love to spend your last moments of life doing that knowing that if those photos might help people understand volcanoes and their associated hazards even a tiny better in the future it was worth it.
You could call it tragic, and of course it is, but I prefer to call it badass.
science_memes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.