Windspren
Windspren
29 / 6
4th Aug 2016
18th Oct 2016
Coming in the Past! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC_yh8ga1fmrZMUuIU_-UZL7yuFsOLZ9ciBXOb3LFIs/edit?usp=sharing
nationwide spacewide bunkerwide wide space spaceship puns avithemurderer ship

Comments

  • Windspren
    Windspren
    15th Aug 2016
    This is the design for the scanner, thrown together mainly to look cool.
  • Kostia4381
    Kostia4381
    15th Aug 2016
    You bet your ass it's complicated. (I'm actually a minor engineer/programmer IRL.)
  • Windspren
    Windspren
    15th Aug 2016
    That sounds... complicated, and seeing as how you can fit a quantum computer capable of simulating every particle in the universe on a ring, that sounds achievable.
  • Kostia4381
    Kostia4381
    15th Aug 2016
    Now we just need an engineer to make the hardware.
  • Windspren
    Windspren
    15th Aug 2016
    I'm back
  • Kostia4381
    Kostia4381
    15th Aug 2016
    STEP 1. 360() scan from the ship to identify particles. STEP 2. Quantum teleportation to particles that are more than a light second away. Also, scans from the bots are made. STEP 3. Repeat step 2 until memory is full. STEP 4. Return to ship, deposit data to the processor, and repeat steps 2-3 until the app is turned off.
  • Kostia4381
    Kostia4381
    15th Aug 2016
    The particles are confirmed by taking a video of the 360() area around the ship, a simulation is ran, then pictures are being taken. The range might be bumped up to the entire Virgo Supercluster if 1. enough storage is provided (At least 1 million Yottabytes), and 2. generally a extemely good computer. It's a chain reaction.
  • Windspren
    Windspren
    15th Aug 2016
    You could just have them use superposition drives to teleport outwards in a large sphere, constantly taking scans.
  • Windspren
    Windspren
    15th Aug 2016
    You could use dimensionally unfolded proton computers instead of nanobots, but how are you detecting the particles that the bots would teleport to?
  • Kostia4381
    Kostia4381
    15th Aug 2016
    Mistake there, it's a terabyte instead of an exabyte, and it's 1 exabyte that gets processed