Posts by MagusUnion

Quote from Kuudere

It has to do with the most efficient fusion pathway, what's referred to as the D-T (Deuterium-Tritium) fuel cycle.
Deuterium-2 + Tritium-3 ---> Helium-4 +n

Where the 2 neutrons in the deuterium and the 3 in the tritium together constitute the 4 in the resultant helium atom plus a free neutron. It is this free neutron that then reacts with lithium in the D-T design to produce power in the
n + Lithium-6 ---> Tritium-3 + Helium-4
pathway.
When encountering Lithium-7, the
n + Lithium-7 ---> Tritium-3 + Helium-4 + n
pathway occurs, which fails to produce energy, but repopulates the reaction with neutrons, thus helping it continue, so a D-T reactor would contain both isotopes of Lithium.

so tl; dr: The number of neutrons is important. You can also less efficiently use Deuterium-2 + Deuterium-2 in the D-D fuel cycle.
I think there was some fusion pathway that uses vanilla hydrogen to combine with a heavier element to reduce neuton production (because energetic neutrons will cook your face) but I forget.

Display More

Ah, I see now... makes sense considering.. ty for the explanation.

Hopefully I can install this with little to no conflicts now that I'm on my machine again, lol...

Crazy Amazing! Probably going to feature this in my 'Let's Play' once I can get my PC hooked up and online again. Truly nice work!

A few things:
1. I'm guessing rockets are 1-time use only? (if not, then what's the means to refuel them?)

2. (Off-topic, since I covered this in class today, lol) what's the reasoning about using heavier Hydrogen for Fusion? Is it the instability of the nucleus to circumvent the Weak/Electromagnetic forces, or something else entirely?

Will 1.7 work with 1.15 IC^2? I'm waiting on a few other Add-On's to update before I move on to the latest version of IC^2, lol

(If not, can I get the most recent back version of this add-on for that version of IC, if it's not too much to ask?)

Quote from Ranakastrasz

The first is easily do-able with the force field addon, the second is a bit more complex however, I am not sure how you would do it.

Wireless Remote + Jump... But don't take my word on it (lol)

Yeah... homogenization is the death of WOW games in general... So disregard my last then...

Although I have an interesting 'Plasma Coil' design with multiple reactors running at once, lol...

Best option I can say so far is to have custom recipes installed, and write a conversion between IC-RP ingots... That's what I have for me...

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U8Rc3aXW94

Agreed... because I find that the only way to increase storage capacity in IC^2 is via personal chests...

Quote from markman1111

Whilst yes, it does take a long time for plant matter to be compressed into coal, but there's no other reaction for it to be made into coal other than immense pressure.

P.S. Did you read the whole thing? I'm assuming you did, but it doesn't seem like it.

You're arguing with a geologist about how coal is formed... I did read the whole thing, and no, your statement about how it's a 'pressure-only' system is flat out wrong...

Source: http://www.uky.edu/KGS/coal/coalform.htm

There's alot of other organic, biological and chemical, changes that also have to occur with decayed matter before pressure and temperature can come in and take over the process. So Charcoal -> Coal would simply be both game breaking and illogical from a resource perspective...

Edit: Dehydration of sugar... however... lol

True... but some of us have already had this for awhile... basically, he wants to have ALL the ore be grindable in a Macerator...

Personally, I find that Redpower's ore still breaks a bit of gameplay balance on that end... so while the 'ineffieceny' of having to smelt is a constant problem, I do think it's a necessary stop-break for not having tons of copper (or more specifically, Tin, since I bet that's what you really want it for), and making the resource so obscurely abundant with little to no difficulty to obtain...

No...

the amount of geological time that has to pass for Coal to even form is so great that there is no conceivable way to manufacture it in an Industrial setting... You literally have to find a way to re-arrange the atoms in charcoal in order to get it close to a coal-like state...

In which case, you are better off using alchemy for this... LOL

Edit: Yes, there are other alchemy forge-compatible mods than EE... In fact I re-engineered BTW to have a slight Alchemy component to it as well...

Liquid energy, atm, is one of the better systems of energy so far... with Geothermal, you do have to (not-so-much-now) tediously farm lava to feed into a Geothermal system. Which, in some/most cases, requires nether hopping and the transfer of cells from place to place. In mid-game, Geothermal is a very attractive form of energy generation...

But towards late game, water mills look attractive due to the fact that resources (should) be very readily available for them. A constant, 24/7 energy system, which does not require feeding can be of great benefit for many users. The reason why the yield is not high is because it is constant, static energy generation. No matter where you are in the world, or at what times the systems are running, you will always be accumulating energy from your setup.

For instance, on my v2 Industrial Dam, I have 16 by 20 towers in it (that's 16 towers, 20 Watermills per tower). That's 320 Water Mills in total. At pure saturation (where each mill is mostly, if not completely, covered by water), a mill will generate close to .21 EU/t. Thus, the Dam itself generates 67.2 EU/t of energy every game second. That's actually runs in competition with Nuclear energy, because while it requires a HUGE amount of machines, it does not run the risk of exploding, nor do you have to keep feeding it with materials (as this attribute is optional with Water Mills in general).

So no, Water Mills don't generate 'huge 1337 amounts' of EU... but they have the highest reliability out of all the energy generation means.

(although now that I think about it... I do think that they deserve a bit of a buff... lol)

Quote from Rick

Cells must be reusable else i will never ever gonna spend my resources to get some eu back i rather make solargens or windgens which will produce more in the end and will be really cheap.

In that case, just use the add-on 'bucket filler' and cycle your buckets around with BC pipes to fill your generators...

Link: http://www.minecraftforum.net/…dcraft-224-bucket-filler/

I think another 'flaw' with this is the fact that you will have 'cobblestone excess'... a.k.a, remains of rock from the supercooled lava that remain after injecting a ton of molten liquid into the system.

From what I can gather, it seems like you are harnessing the heat entropy of the cooling process from lava itself. I like this proposal, yet I find it quite lacking. How about this, instead of creating a meter-based system (with water levels and such), have a system similar to nuclear energy:

Grid:
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_

In this grid, you place in lava cells, much like you would with Nuclear energy.

_|W|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
W|L|W|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|W|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_

where...
W: Water Cell
L: Lava Cell

The cells, as they 'vent', emit and release heat at an alarming rate. At 10000 Kelvin, the entire chamber 'melts' (i.e. instantly becomes a lava block, and starts rapidly spreading).
After the cells have been 'used up', the socket is then replaced by about 4 cobble stone to represent the 'decayed' molten material.
Each water/coolant cell absorbs heat similar to the nuclear system. The only difference is that GeoGens would have a lower threshold for containing heat, as this heat is able to spread via conduction/convection. This is MUCH different than nuclear's radiation of heat (which transmits much differently), as well as the factors for lava cells multiplying their heat variable is much lower, as the material is constantly interacting with itself, and becoming one 'cell', rather than back-burning triggers like the atomic chain firings of atomic fission. Also, because the lava is much more 'free flowing' than nuclear, the cells are consumed much more rapidly than nuclear's process of energy management.

Thus the goal would be to get as much heat out of the system, while at the same time keeping the overall generator heat low, and thus EU generation maxed out.

Lava Cell:
EU Output: 10 Eu/t
Lasts: 2000 ticks
Heat: 250k per tick

Water Cell:
0 EU
Absorbs: 100k per tick
Lasts: 2000 ticks

Coolant Cell:
0 EU
Absorbs: 150k per tick
Lasts: 1500 ticks

Adjacent Lava cell EU/Heat multiplier: 1.5

(numbers can be adjusted for balance reasons)...

It's.... UU Matter... And you can't find a use for it?

I guess I can forgive you, since that avatar is epic, lol

OR!

You can use a handy mod called 'Custom Recipes' and write your own self-conversion for this problem.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U8Rc3aXW94

Quote from Rick

A lava lake in the normal world can have a few hundreds of lava in it no need to go to the nether XD.

I think the Nether option is mostly for people who don't have liquid teleport pipes.. idk why not have them, tbh, but still... *shrug*

Mobile Pump + Lava Tanks = instant Lava Cells... alot better than the IC method...

Quote from Rekalty

I would say, they are. I have yet to see any pratical way to use them, and their output is simply weak.

*cough*: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u8vuMDY6hY

Update your BTW version... in the first port to 1.8 (2.96 I believe) there was a bug involving both crafting and using Nethercoal (one which I could easily circumvent, mind you... but still stupidly annoying...)

But yes, Nethercoal produces 8000 EU... which isn't a ton better than other forms of energy, but you can grind up Charcoal into Carbon Powder, and then create Nethercoal via it and Hellfire Dust inside a cauldron. This way you don't constantly need coal in order to get that 8k EU output...

Oh, and ty for the link nathan.. good to see that my stuff is useful to more people than just myself.. lol

Quote from Ranakastrasz

Now if only there was some kinda of intuitive explanation for this that anyone could figure out easily... the current mechanic is not obvious, and the EU reader does not help.

I think it's a bit counter intuitive.. but if you do your homework on True electrical engineering, then it shows that the Rate of EU transfer is not the same as the Amount of energy running per second (or tick, in this case). In which case, you can have a large amount of electrons 'streaming' at once in a current (thus creating higher voltage) |OR| you can split apart the amount of released energy into timed packets, and reduce the overall voltage of the current...

Interesting, to say the least...