Hey Everyone,
I am new to the Eclipse Phase setting (as a player) and my game-master suggested I come here for some of my questions regarding technology in Eclipse Phase. They are rather specific questions, so bear with me. I realize all of these may be subject to modification based on the ruling game-master's whim and fancy. In absence of real answers, I will accept suitably realistic pseudoscience.
What type of He-3 fusion reactor does the setting use? Is it similar to the TOKAMAK design or something entirely different? Do they use RF heating or something else? Does it change by habitat?
How are synthetic morphs powered? Do they have an on board reactor? Is it battery powered? Nuclear battery powered? Along those lines, do they require He-3 to survive? How long do the batteries last? What radioisotope is used in the nuclear batteries?
Semi-related to the last question, what radioisotope is used in the nuclear batteries used to charge beam weapon batteries? Is it a thermocouple? Alphavoltaic? Betavoltaic? photovoltaic?
Is the neutrino detector's active material toxic? Is it hygroscopic or similarly degraded in 'normal' atmospheric conditions (like one would expect in a habitat)? I.E. is a damaged neutrino detector dangerous to those around them? will damage to the outside destroy the actual function of the detector?
My last question is more of just a rules interpretation question. Do nanophages protect against, say, disassembler nanoswarms or is a guardian nanoswarm needed to protect against them?
Thank you!
Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.
Technology Questions
Sun, 2012-03-04 14:52
#1
hawthrone690
Technology Questions
Sun, 2012-03-04 19:12
#2
Axel the Chimeric
Re: Technology Questions
I can answer at least two of these:
[b]Synthetic Morph Power[/b]
Most synthmorphs will use either a nuclear or rechargeable battery, not an internal reactor. The particular type/s of battery/batteries used will depend on the needs of the synthmorph. Your average synthmorph living in a big city or on a hab will use a standard rechargeable battery because it's safer and there's not likely to be a shortage of power. Nuclear batteries will be common for those living in isolated areas, or who regularly venture outside of habitats (such as Martian terraformers or gatecrashers). Anarchists also probably have them, just for good measure.
The specific forms of nuclear battery used will depend on the power needs of the morph. A standard synth or even a case will have far lower demands for power and, hence, will place longevity over output. Hence, their batteries will have much longer half-lives. Meanwhile, someone sleeved in, say, a reaper will be using much higher output batteries. Most likely, anyone using a nuclear battery will also have a recharge battery, which will absorb power when in low-use mode and provide it in high-use mode.
[b]Nanophages/Disassemblers[/b]
Nanophages are assumed to affect nanobots attacking your body, with a particular focus on internal security. They're designed to work inside the body. More specifically, they affect nanotoxins most effectively of all. Disassembler swarms, meanwhile, attack from the outside in. As such, they'd be ripping you to pieces and have already done considerable damage before your nanophages even detected them. While your nanophages might provide some sort of defense, they'd ultimately be fighting a losing battle as the territory they're designed to work in is rapidly destroyed.
So, in short, I'd say that, no, nanophages wouldn't protect you. That's what guardian swarms are for, and that's how the rules seem written anyway.
—
[img]http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/982/exhumanbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/4473/scumbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1396/gatecrasherbar.jpg[/img]
[code][@-rep +1, f-rep +2][/code]
Mon, 2012-03-05 10:55
#3
Arenamontanus
Re: Technology Questions
I don't think it has been stated, but I assume something like a tokamak using RF heating (or maybe laser heating, given the advanced optics). I assume at least older reactors used deuterium +helium reactions, but in modern reactors it might be just pure helium (and hence less radioactive).
I don't think there is anything in the description telling us what is in it. I suspect it could be almost anything, so it is not implausible that high-performance detectors could contain nasty materials. I suspect in EP there might be some new physics used to up the bandwidth, so that material could be almost anything.
I would say they are fairly useless, since they are intended to work in a body - that is, not upset the immune system, not hurt it when fighting intruders etc. - so they are fairly circumscribed. Guardians on the other hand are likely rather corrosive when doing their job, so you don't want too many of them in you.
—
Mon, 2012-03-05 19:06
#4
NewAgeOfPower
Re: Technology Questions
In the text it is clearly stated that Helium-3 mining operations occur for fusion fuel. This means that EP reactors are probably of the Hydrogen-2 + Helium 3 variety, due to the rarity of He3, this would use the limited Helium 3 in the most efficient manner. It is also the most energetic fusion reaction, slightly more energetic than the Deuterium-Tritium reaction.
While Hydrogen 2 + Hydrogen 3 does eject a neutron, Hydrogen 2 + Helium 3 does not. Therefore, for reducing secondary radiological effects, the He3+H2 reactors would be 'cleaner'. He3 + He3 fusion is even more difficult to achieve, given the increased Coloumb forces required to overcome the extra proton's electromagnetic force...
As to what sort of reactors are used, given that EP magnetohydrodynamic technology allows morphs to survive in the solar corona, it is indeed plausible TOKAMAK or other similar plasma torus designs are most efficient. However, for compact military applications, I envision Laser/Maser/etc-pumped pulsed inertial fusion reactors to be used, despite the extreme tolerances required in construction and operationg (injection of Hohlraums at precise time intervals, etc), and additional fuel processing cost (Manufacturing Hohlraum fuel pellets, etc)
—
As mind to body, so soul to spirit.
As death to the mortal man, so failure to the immortal.
Such is the price of all ambition.
Thu, 2012-03-08 22:12
#5
hawthrone690
Re: Technology Questions
Thank you all for your comments! I am sorry it took me so long to respond, I became a little discouraged after finding the part of Panopticon on fission power. While I appreciate some leeway must be given for sci-fi, it hurt my little brain.
I was hoping for a little more specifics in nuclear battery/rechargable battery lifetimes (like how long one might expect a synth battery to last on a typical Martian model) but I suppose my poor gamemaster will have to deal with that. :)
Yes, but D-D fusion can produce neutrons. With a plasma of He-3 and D, you will inevitably have D-D fusion. If the goal is to reduce neutron emissions entirely, this would be a poor choice. That being said, some of the rarer elements could potentially be manufactured via neutron activation. Since I get the impression that nano-fabrication has resulted in elements, not materials, having value, this may be a wise choice. Of course, using a fission reactor may be a wiser choice for this sort of activation anyway.
Accepting you are going to have D-D fusion, it might be worthwhile to go the whole shabang and utilize D-D, D-T, and D-He3 fusion by breeding tritium via lithium inside your first wall. Resulting He-4 (your exhaust) could be used as a cryogenic coolant for your massive, supercooled superconductors. This waste, once loaded with heat, could be vented into space (in the case of orbital or lagrangian habitats) to avoid the necessity of heat loss through black body radiation. Of course, this would require some source of deuterium as well (the solar wind, perhaps) and some way to dispose of the activated reactor components at the end of the reactor's lifetime. Thinking about it, you may even want to use the He-4 as a coolant. The rankine cycle is more efficient at higher temperatures and 'futuristic radiation/heat resistant materials' could survive much higher temperatures.
All that being said, from a design standpoint, having neutron free fusion would be absolutely fantastic. Gives those with an ample supply of He-3 for sale quite the political bargaining chip.
Fri, 2012-03-09 07:01
#6
Axel the Chimeric
Re: Technology Questions
The game actually lists an average rechargeable battery life of 400-500 hours, or approximately a week and a half. However, microwave power transmission is so ubiquitous that most synths never need to sit down for a long time to charge.
As for nuclear batteries... Again, depends on the half-life. Some could have batteries that last a very short time indeed. Meanwhile, if you can somehow run yourself off a lump of uranium-238, you're looking at a lifespan measured in more time than human civilization. The longer the half-life, though, the less power.
—
[img]http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/982/exhumanbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/4473/scumbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/1396/gatecrasherbar.jpg[/img]
[code][@-rep +1, f-rep +2][/code]
Sun, 2012-03-11 14:08
#7
hawthrone690
Re: Technology Questions
Ah, thanks Axel. I guess I missed that when I was reading through the books. Week and a half, good to know.
As far as RF heating (of He-3 reactors) goes, I realized it wouldn't work. At least not initially. Helium-3 has no net proton spin! RF heating only works on nuclei with an odd number of protons! After you have some fusion, however, you will have hydrogen buildup in your reactor (as well as deuterium and tritium buildup) and those can be heated using RF techniques. That being said, the buildup of these elements will also produce neutrons (as they fusion) so it wouldn't entirely be neutron-free. Plus you would get a buildup of positrons! Yay, Antimatter!
A couple more fresh questions:
I realize in the case of children it may be favorable to grow the morph from a wee-child, allowing their ego to grow with the body. In the case of a biomorph to be used to sleeve in a tourist, why would you bother growing it? It seems like nano-fabrication would be much easier?
The only reason I can think of is the longer process has a more stable load on the electrical system. Since fusion reactors are better fitted for base loading anyway, this might be preferable for the habitats systems. Other than that?
Secondly, why aren't there 'disassemblers' or 'reverse engineering nano-defabs'? If seems like if you have the technology to use nanomachines to perfectly build an object, you could disassemble something and create a perfect blueprint. While it would replicate any wear or damage on the object, it seems like it would have some major advantages. It would allow hypercorps to understand and steal competing technologies and it would allow autonomists to steal the same technology. Yeah, it would probably regulated to heck and back, but shouldn't it exist?
Thanks again!
Mon, 2012-03-12 07:33
#8
Arenamontanus
Re: Technology Questions
There have been some discussions here about how good nanoassembly of soft semifluid materials really are. One can certainly grow cells in a medium and then stack them together, but pure nanofabrication seems to be tricky (and inefficient: general manufacturing is often more expensive than specialised, even in nanoassembly). This is likely the real difference between biomorphs and pods: pods use living materials that were put together artificially without long-range growth (it takes about a year for a limb axon to grow to full length even with speeded up proliferation, so they are replaced with bionics). So for tourist sleeves, pods are presumably the cheap solution.
General nanodisassembly is a much trickier process than it looks. Molecules are often bound together with strong bonds in manufactured objects, and there are no ways to "see" what lies under the surface - so you have to do trial and error, quite likely breaking both your tooltips and the surface.
In practice automated reverse engineering is possible for more constrained domains. If the only thing that matters is shape down to a certain resolution, one can imagine a counterpart to laser measurement scanning to replicate it. Most everyday objects are made of standard nanomodules fitted together, which makes recycling easier. The big problem is devices with dense or soft structures, strained chemical bonds, or deliberate anti-reverse engineering measures (compartments filled with noble gas that will trigger self-destruct if they are emptied, for example).
So I think reverse engineering is big business, often uses automated systems (I posted about some AI papers about automated mechanism inference at this forum at some point), but it is not quick and easy except for very simple things. Making backups of your kid's beloved toys, scratches an all, is easy. Backing up your dog, not so easy.
—
Mon, 2012-03-12 18:54
#9
Prophet710
Re: Technology Questions
That brings to mind the first Homeworld game. Hi-sci-fi I know but is it plausible to just atomize something you want to recycle then using some kind of torch and then collect said atoms with some kind of magnetic ram scoop and let the nano-systems filter and sift through what base elements remain, that way you have raw materials to work with. Nice and recycled.
—
"And yet, across the gulf of space, minds immeasurably superior to ours regarded this Earth with envious eyes. And slowly, and surely, they drew their plans against us."