[Megathread] Mass Effect 3

[Elim Garak]

Which ending?

[May90]

That being said, you have to admit that applying a positive or negative current on an element to create a field that lower of increase mass (it says mass in the codex, not weight), that does very likely sound like science fiction, admittedly good science fiction, since it can explain how electric current from nervous system could also interact with it thus explaining biotic 'powers'.

That doesn't sound so fantastic, since discovery of Higgs boson already implies that something like this is possible, positive current being a Higgs boson flux and negative being a Higgs anti-boson, provided the latter exists - and yes, it is about mass, not weight. Technologically it should be impossible since the energy to create even 1 Higgs boson is so huge that the whole Earth needs to explode to get any significant amount of these that can be used for any practical purposes. But then, again, there might be other particles, other fields, other mechanisms we have not yet discovered. Existence of something like Element Zero doesn't sound so fantastic to me.

What did seem fantastic, however, was how different races were alike. They look differently, they have different physiology, history and culture, they have emerged in completely different climates and surfaces - and yet they all have the same feelings: sadness, jealousy, love, anger, laughter... Somehow I cannot believe that Krogan have the same brawls humans in slums do, or that the Asari nerds are as shy as human nerds. But, well, it is a video game after all, not a demonstration of the Probability Theory.

Which ending?

Starcraft 2, I guess. This game has the most unreachable ending ever. I have played it for over a year and still cannot get to the ending of my addiction...

[Nazrark]

Which part? The crazy rants or the science mumbojumbo?

Both, we honestly make a lot of sense to ourselves. We also tend to deal with the whiny kids who come in here fairly quickly.

[Deleted]

Both, we honestly make a lot of sense to ourselves. We also tend to deal with the whiny kids who come in here fairly quickly.

We are a small circlejerking community.

[Dhrizzle]

@May90

Whilst FTL travel is not theoretically impossible, it is still in the realms of fantasy and anything that makes it possible - including warp-drives, hyperspace travel, inertia-less drives and eezo - remain as space magic. The closest you can get in hard science-fiction is wormholes which, whilst not actually known to exist, as still somewhat undersood. ME3 mimics the idea of a wormhole network with the Mass Relays but does so in a way that is well outside of the current understanding of physics.

The applications of Eezo also don't hang together very well. The first and easiest target are biotics, which follow as much logic and science as the gamma-radiation that created the Hulk or the cosmic rays responsible for the Fantastic Four. They're magic with a slight gloss of sciencification.

FTL travel in Mass Effect is very similar to the Lensman series' inertialess drives but with a key distinction. In the Lensman series all that is reduced or eliminated is the inertia of mass, not the mass itself. Effectively it changes the laws of physics for the affected ship so its top speed is decided purely by its thrust versus the friction of the medium it is traveling through (in other words the resistive force of hydrogen atoms).

Mass Effect makes it quite clear that eezo affects gravitational mass, so any improved flight capabilities come from changing the properties of the material, not the physical laws bounding it. Even taken down to zero mass the maximum speed attainable would be that of light, not 50 times like human ships or 10,000 like the Reapers.

Then there is eezo as artificial gravity, which would either create a gravity well that the ship would constantly be falling into, or would have to be located somewhere on the ship meaning the inverse square rule would make the gravity inconsistent on higher levels. Plus we then have the problem of simultaneously making the mass great enough to provide gravity whilst simultaneously diminished enough to allow FTL travel.

I really like the tech in Mass Effect and it's clear that in-universe it is all understood from a scientific view-point, but eezo is still basically pixie-dust that allows the universe to function how the writers want it to, rather than a scientific possibility that the writers are exploring.

[Durandro]

The best thing about Science Fiction is it so often quickly becomes outdated by modern technology. Even 50 years ago the idea of having mobile phones like we have now wasn't even imagined - communicators in Star Trek are huge in comparison!

Eventually, maybe not for hundreds or thousands of years, we'll have technology that makes Mass Effect look primative. Though FTL may still be out of our reach, but the thing with human invention is it continually breaks the boundries of what is considered possible. And I love that. To even have a chance of being forever fiction you have to be extremely outlandish!

[zealo]

Yes.

Also, isnt it time to argue over the ending again?
I feel like the circle have gotten rather slow.

I agree, been a few pages since there's been a tasty ME3 ending rant now.

As for endings, i want to replay kotor 2 but would have to buy it again for PC so i can use the content restoring mod, while ME3 had a bad ending that game went as far as to not include one at all on the original xbox version.

[Vankrys]

The best thing about Science Fiction is it so often quickly becomes outdated by modern technology. Even 50 years ago the idea of having mobile phones like we have now wasn't even imagined - communicators in Star Trek are huge in comparison!

Eventually, maybe not for hundreds or thousands of years, we'll have technology that makes Mass Effect look primative. Though FTL may still be out of our reach, but the thing with human invention is it continually breaks the boundries of what is considered possible. And I love that. To even have a chance of being forever fiction you have to be extremely outlandish!

star trek teleporter are not outdated yet

[May90]

Whilst FTL travel is not theoretically impossible, it is still in the realms of fantasy and anything that makes it possible - including warp-drives, hyperspace travel, inertia-less drives and eezo - remain as space magic. The closest you can get in hard science-fiction is wormholes which, whilst not actually known to exist, as still somewhat undersood. ME3 mimics the idea of a wormhole network with the Mass Relays but does so in a way that is well outside of the current understanding of physics.

Wormholes are a good example. But it is possible that FTL can exist normally even in our simple space, just as in Mass Effect, and there are millions of theoretical models allowing it and, at the same time, not contradicting modern experimental evidence. It would be very easy to achieve in 5+-dimensional world. Wormholes are possible only because the world has 4 dimensions: 3 spaces and 1 time, and this 4th dimension already makes travel in certain 1-dimensional way possible. For 6 dimensions, it is already 3-dimensional way of possible FTL, which is the whole space. In String Theory, there are models with 6, 11, 23, as many dimensions as you want, and if it is actually the way the Universe is, then FTL speed is absolutely normal and technologically achievable.

The applications of Eezo also don't hang together very well. The first and easiest target are biotics, which follow as much logic and science as the gamma-radiation that created the Hulk or the cosmic rays responsible for the Fantastic Four. They're magic with a slight gloss of sciencification.

If Eezo (atom of 0 mass able to increase or decrease mass of other elements) actually existed, it would resemble the way Biotic powers are used in ME quite well. IF it existed...

Mass Effect makes it quite clear that eezo affects gravitational mass, so any improved flight capabilities come from changing the properties of the material, not the physical laws bounding it. Even taken down to zero mass the maximum speed attainable would be that of light, not 50 times like human ships or 10,000 like the Reapers.

The way I understood it, the Eezo can effectively set a mass of an element to negative value. It does not contradict any physical laws, actually: negative mass for "negative" people would feel exactly the same as positive mass for "positive" people. Again, if graviton, the particle conducting gravitational interaction, has an antiparticle, then an object with negative mass is just the one spreading around anti-gravitons instead of gravitons. Two negative masses would interact which other exactly the way two positive masses do because two minus signs are annihilated in multiplication. And, according, again, to equations of General Relativity, it would lead to FTL speeds in the surrounding space.

The reason negative mass today is considered impossible is simply because, if it did exist, it would violate Einstein's equation E=mc^2, so an element not moving anywhere with negative mass would, strictly speaking, have negative energy, and it is quite hard to comprehend physically. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist, however, more likely it simply means that we do not yet understand how to interpret "pure" negative energy.

Then there is eezo as artificial gravity, which would either create a gravity well that the ship would constantly be falling into, or would have to be located somewhere on the ship meaning the inverse square rule would make the gravity inconsistent on higher levels. Plus we then have the problem of simultaneously making the mass great enough to provide gravity whilst simultaneously diminished enough to allow FTL travel.

Honestly, I didn't completely understand how they created artificial gravity on ships. Explanation in codex is too vague and casual. I believe it would be possible, though.

I really like the tech in Mass Effect and it's clear that in-universe it is all understood from a scientific view-point, but eezo is still basically pixie-dust that allows the universe to function how the writers want it to, rather than a scientific possibility that the writers are exploring.

Well, they had to come up with some explanation of FTL speeds and "magical" powers, hadn't they? I think they explained it quite well. Way better than in Star Wars lore, where Force is some mystical substance not detectable by anything or anyone except for force sensitives, and FTL speeds are not explained at all, actually.

[Deleted]

star trek teleporter are not outdated yet

I love how we humans can turn something that doesnt exist, and possibly never will be (and never will be with "ordinary" things in fantasy such as elves) into something so mundane and commonplace.

The reason negative mass today is considered impossible is simply because, if it did exist, it would violate Einstein's equation E=mc^2, so an element not moving anywhere with negative mass would, strictly speaking, have negative energy, and it is quite hard to comprehend physically. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist, however, more likely it simply means that we do not yet understand how to interpret "pure" negative energy.

It would move backwards?

[May90]

It would move backwards?

Well, with negative kinetic energy, yes, it would move backwards in space. With negative total energy, however... It would be something really evil. Maybe it would simply be something like a small anti-black hole that would infinitely release energy in the surrounding space. Or maybe it would be just usual object that would sap a bit of surrounding energy upon its destruction. I really don't know, and I doubt anyone knows. Since, as far as I'm concerned, no models with negative total energy have been seriously considered by modern science yet. But, it is more because of the religious side of science than out of common sense. Scientists are so devoted in belief that the law of energy conservation cannot be broken that they are almost about to burn those heretics who think otherwise.

[Elim Garak]

But, it is more because of the religious side of science than out of common sense. Scientists are so devoted in belief that the law of energy conservation cannot be broken that they are almost about to burn those heretics who think otherwise.

It's not a belief. Conservation of energy in an isolated system law cannot be broken. It's a fact.
Negative mass or anti-matter/anti-energy (same thing really) doesn't exist because it cannot exist in positive space (which is positive mass/energy - our universe). It would be instantly annihilated.
When two masses interact with each other it's not a multiplication - it's addition, addition does nothing with the "sign". The result of two negative masses interacting will be a negative sum - but only in negative universe such thing can occur.

The only viable FTL theory is the one about warping space.

[Deleted]

So how would a gun that fires negative mass work?

[rhorle]

It's not a belief. Conservation of energy in an isolated system law cannot be broken. It's a fact. Negative mass or anti-matter/anti-energy (same thing really) doesn't exist because it cannot exist in positive space (which is positive mass/energy - our universe).

That isn't entirely true since a very small amount of Antiparticles are formed when cosmic rays hit the earths atmosphere. A Nobel peace prize was also awarded for the confirmation of Anti protons. So we know that anti "things" can exist in our universe with out being instantly annihilated. As you can still detect them.

Also all scientific theories and laws are beliefs. They are what is believed to be true until a new theory or law comes about that disproves the previous ones. The biggest problem with science is when scientists assume something is always true and thus that which contradicts it is dismissed as impossible.

[May90]

It's not a belief. Conservation of energy in an isolated system law cannot be broken. It's a fact.

It is a fact installed by Newton's theory which was proven wrong when Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics appeared. Since then, scientists tried all possible ways, including changing interpretation of the very term "energy", to save the law of conservation. Although in one of recent experiments the law was actually broken manually, by making a real particle interact with virtual one and, therefore, "leech" energy from vacuum. This experiment, however, again was interpreted in such a way which saves the law of conservation. But many scientists disagreed with this interpretation. We cannot hold on to ancient laws for centuries, sometimes we need to replace them with modern ones.

Besides, even if the conservation of energy really was true for isolated systems, there is no proof that our system is isolated at all. For example, in multiuniverse models law of energy or, for that matter, also of momentum conservation just stops making sense, because our universe constantly interacts with other universes cosmologically, but not exactly materially (so we cannot travel to other universes, but they are still there). Multidimensional models are another example, with energy being conserve in X-dimensional world but volatile in our 4-dimensional "subworld".
And these models are not some weird mathematical abstraction. They are based on solid experimental evidence; for example, if Sterile Neutrinos will be found, then this alone through complex Particle Theory will lead to proof that the world is multidimensional.

Negative mass or anti-matter/anti-energy (same thing really) doesn't exist because it cannot exist in positive space (which is positive mass/energy - our universe). It would be instantly annihilated.

This is wrong. Antiparticle and particle with negative mass are different things. Particle and antiparticle annihilate through Electric, Weak or Strong interaction. Particles with positive and negative mass would theoretically be able to annihilate through Gravitational interaction, but this interaction is so much weaker than other 3 that cross section would be too negligible to notice it even in a very precise experiment. So, no, this is essentially wrong.

When two masses interact with each other it's not a multiplication - it's addition, addition does nothing with the "sign". The result of two negative masses interacting will be a negative sum - but only in negative universe such thing can occur.

Gravitational force is proportional to production of 2 masses: F = G*m1*m2/R^2. If two masses change sign, the result will not change.

The only viable FTL theory is the one about warping space.

It is not actually FTL theory, since FTL speed there is essentially a mathematical trick. Nothing there moves with FTL speed, it is just space itself is twisted in such a way that it creates a much shorter rout.

And statements like "X is the only viable theory in the world" always make me cringe...

So how would a gun that fires negative mass work?

I think the first one to answer this question will get the Nobel.

So we know that anti "things" can exist in our universe with out being instantly annihilated. As you can still detect them.

I will say even more. There are almost a many anti-neutrinos in our universe as there are neutrinos. Cross section of their interaction is so small that they can remain unannihilated for centuries.

Actually, I do not completely understand why there is more matter than antimatter. I tried to get into models explaining it, but something felt off in them. But then, I am just as good in pure theory as in Sikh history.

[Elim Garak]

That isn't entirely true since a very small amount of Antiparticles are formed when cosmic rays hit the earths atmosphere. A Nobel peace prize was also awarded for the confirmation of Anti protons. So we know that anti "things" can exist in our universe with out being instantly annihilated. As you can still detect them.

They are detected via detection of their annihilation. When a particle encounters its antiparticle - they annihilate. Simple antiparticle (like positron) can exist in a "corresponding particle"-free space, theoretically - but it is practically impossible to create such space. Composite antiparticle (like anti-proton) can annihilate with any composite particle (proton, neutron) - so they can exist only in complete absence of any matter/energy - and even free-space vacuum is not that perfect.

Also all scientific theories and laws are beliefs.

Just no. You either do not understand science or are trying to semantically portray it as blind faith, for whatever reason

[rhorle]

Just no. You either do not understand science or are trying to semantically portray it as blind faith, for whatever reason

The world once thought it was a scientific fact that the Earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around the earth. Science is a collection of beliefs that have not yet been proven false. Nothing I said portrays science as blind faith, that is actually the furthest from what I said. Blind faith would indicate that there are no experiments or attempts to prove or disprove it. Because it is taken on Blind faith.

Also practically impossible does not mean impossible, which means that they can exist with out instantly being annihilated. We also know that it is not anywhere near practically impossible as CERN managed to hold anti-hydrogen in place for a sixth of a second and then later for over 15 mins. That shows that is is both practically possible and that they do not always get annihilated instantly.

http://www.eiroforum.org/activities/...ERN/index.html

[Elim Garak]

It is a fact installed by Newton's theory which was proven wrong when Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics appeared.

Oh my... Newton's theory was proven wrong? Really? What's next Euclidean geometry was proven wrong too by Lobachevsky and Riemann?

Besides, even if the conservation of energy really was true for isolated systems, there is no proof that our system is isolated at all.

Really? How about factual observation of the law working in our universe? You know? Vacuum fluctuations? The annihilation process of particle/antiparticle?

For example, in multiuniverse models

1. As if multiuniverse is proven?
2. As if multiuniverse is not an isolated system?

This is wrong. Antiparticle and particle with negative mass are different things.

It is still under debate either antiparticles have negative mass or charge. But they do either of those as negative - that's a fact. The general leaning is to charge though. But negative mass is still just a hypothesis.

Particle and antiparticle annihilate through Electric, Weak or Strong interaction.

They annihilate when they collide.

Particles with positive and negative mass would theoretically

Hypothetically.

Gravitational force is proportional to production of 2 masses: F = G*m1*m2/R^2. If two masses change sign, the result will not change.

How ironical of you to use Newton's "wrong" formula.

It is not actually FTL theory, since FTL speed there is essentially a mathematical trick. Nothing there moves with FTL speed, it is just space itself is twisted in such a way that it creates a much shorter rout.

You are confused. You even use FTL with speed together as a phrase.

1. FTL means faster than light travel.
2. speed = distance (traveled) / time
3. If you travel 1 ly in half a year - you are traveling faster than light.
4. Traveling faster than light doesn't mean traveling at the speed greater than speed of light in absolute sense. Only relatively speaking as shown in p.2 and p.3.

In conclusion FTL term doesn't imply the absolute speed of travel greater than that of light. FTL is the baby of relativity.

And statements like "X is the only viable theory in the world" always make me cringe...

It's the only theory that doesn't violate speed of light limit and doesn't involve mythical wormholes.

I will say even more. There are almost a many anti-neutrinos in our universe as there are neutrinos. Cross section of their interaction is so small that they can remain unannihilated for centuries.

What are you on? Like really? It is not even clear either neutrino is its own antiparticle, it's really hard to detect neutrinos, but here you are knowing the exact ratio of both.

Actually, I do not completely understand why there is more matter than antimatter. I tried to get into models explaining it, but something felt off in them. But then, I am just as good in pure theory as in Sikh history.

Then read more about it - it's explained by science.

- - - Updated - - -

The world once thought it was a fact that the Earth was flat

Fixed for you.

[Very Tired]

I got an e-mail from Origin saying my password had been reset even though I never requested it to be. Don't think there is anything worth hacking in there seeing as I only played Mass Effect with it.

[Durandro]

star trek teleporter are not outdated yet

Not yet. But they are working on it. The basic principles are already being worked on.