2463 réponses à ce sujet

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

However, sparsely populated areas are also the areas least likely to receive significant eezo exposure.

You come to this conclusion how? That they don't have Reapers actively harvesting them is beside the point. Most of this eezo would be the result of Reaper's being destroyed in orbit, which means the eezo could fall into the upper atmosphere and from there reach any point on the globe.

I allready adressed that. Orbital debris will tend to stay in orbit. Only a limited amount of wreckage will suffer adequate orbital decay in the time between the start of ME3 and the liberation of Earth, and it is the liberation that is more likely to create significant amounts of Orbital Dead Reaper, meaning an even shorter window for that debris to fall from orbit.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

*Fish gets saphra back on the ropes and is delivering a beating*
*Saphra can only block and divert punches now*

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 02 août 2011 - 04:37 .

[SJK93]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

I allready adressed that. Orbital debris will tend to stay in orbit.

No, it will tend to fall back down to the planet.

If it's heading towards Earth at a very high velocity, then it will fall to Earth's surface, but I think it's safe to say that most of the debris from a destroyed ship will stay in orbit.

Modifié par SJK93, 02 août 2011 - 04:41 .

[Sisterofshane]

SandTrout wrote...

In this case, size only matters relative to the available labor pool, which is multiplied by available tools (technology).

At the end of ME3, we are going to have a vast labor pool of refugees that we can theoretically train in order to help with the reconstruction and cleanup, probably in the realm of hundreds of millions of people, considering the size of the Reaper invasion and likely destruction of industrial infrastructure, as well as the drop in demand for luxury items in favor of necessities.

Going by Sis's calculations of surface area b/c I'm too lasy to run the numbers myself, and assuming 100% of that surface area is contaminated, that's ~500 million square km of cleanup, with the majority being seaborne. if these 100 million people, just to provide a baseline number, are capable of cleaning up 1 square km per year per person, that would require ~ 5 years for cleanup. Granted, we don't know how much actual manpower is required to clean a square km of eezo contamination in year, but we are likely looking at an available labor force larger than 100 million, as well as the existing military establishment of the Alliance of ~ 300 million.

So, lets say that it takes an average of 5 man-years per square km of land that needs to be decontaminated. I consider this to be feasible b/c 100% cleanup is not necessary, we just need to reduce contamination to levels that the eco-system can handle on its own. Even with just the baseline 100 million workers, cleanup is in the realm of 25 years, with 20 million square km of landmass decontaminated each year.

Considering that large portions of the landmass, and areas like the ice-caps are less than desirable/productive, we can easily prioritize certain areas such as the American mid-west and indo-china's agricultural regions over Antarctica, the Sahara desert, the Himalaya and Rocky mountain ranges, Siberia.

Within the space of a decade, major population centers could be cleaned up adequately. These are reasonable time-frames in order to maintain the habitability of Earth.

All we need is the workforce and equipment, and size become simply a relative issue.

I already went into this with Saphra, using statistical data on all "usable" land upon the earth to prioritize urban areas and areas used for agriculture, and figuring my numbers based on chernobyl, it would only take a force of 20 percent of the population to begin clean up of the Eezo in a relatively timely manner (again, with the limited of amount of Eezo, roughly 25-50 years per every third of the earth based upon the numbers of chernobyl). So by my numbers, it would only take 75-150 years to clean up all of the Earth's land in entirety.

This is totally feasible, I assumed, because for one, powdered eezo is inherently easier to contain and clean up than waves of radiation.  Not to mention that it is not immediately lethal, and one of the reasons I read about the initial manpower needs being so high was that the radiation exposure was so lethal that every man included in the initial clean up could only be exposed for 40 seconds at a time.  I don't think humans are going to have that kind of problem with Eezo.

Also, given what we know on eezo's lethality rate and Earth's current population, only thirty percent of every generation would "die" from toxic levels of eezo exposure, and that currently generations average about 25 years, I figured that it would take over five hundred years for Earth's population to dwindle to even the tens of millions, clearly sustainable levels, no where near even the threat of becoming "endangered", even if all generations were exposed to the same amount of toxicity as the first. So, combining these two topics would mean we would have most of Earth cleaned WAY before extinction even begins to be tossed around as a notion.

Also, Saphra refuses to even entertain the notion that we will have anything more advanced than a shovel to clean up Eezo with.  Yeah, over 170 years from now we will have FTL drive, colonies on planets across the entire galaxy, and still resort to using manual hand tools as our primary source of cleaning techniques.  Right.  That's the equivalent of me trying to clean my laundry using ashes from my fire that I use to heat up my house and cook my food today. More efficient methods WILL exist.

So why is it so unreasonable to believe that Earth could be saved?

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Oh, here's another example that strengthens my point.

The Citadel.

Anderson estimates it will take them about 5 years to fully restore the station. Needless to say the Citadel is way smaller than Earth.

Only you've already said that the Citadel is not a valid example as relating to our planet as it is in no way comparable to a planet.

Flip-Flop.

[Arijharn]

I think Sandtrout has the right of it there. The fact is that it's the Reaper's and the spread of the contamination itself that makes the situation unorthodox, but generic clean up protocols wouldn't be that much different if multiplied in scale, but obviously the more well-to-do areas will be cleaned up first, and then sort of spreading out from there.

I find it exceptionally to borderline impossible however that we'd be be in a situation where every square km of Earth's surface will be covered, if only because prevalent wind patterns don't follow that pattern.

http://upload.wikime...ds_on_earth.png

As you can see in the picture above, there's very specific sort of patterns that wind follows, which means that you can get a pretty accurate picture of where to start and where to focus your energies upon, it also means that dust form element zero will fall in semi-predictable patterns meaning that depending on whether the Reapers are, its physically impossible for dust to fall into areas that don't match the prevalent wind patterns. If the Reapers are all concentrated in certain areas, then it will mean that it's impossible for dust form element zero to literally blanket the Earth.

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

I allready adressed that. Orbital debris will tend to stay in orbit.

No, it will tend to fall back down to the planet.

Newton's first law, you should review it. If it is in orbit, it will tend to stay that way. Some will suffer adequate orbital decay, but not most.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

Don't forget that all of your numbers are absolutely made up as well, Saphra.

No, they aren't. Eingana gives me numbers to work with.

You could argue that the Reaper force on Earth will be a lot smaller than I'm imagining. That is possible.

The codex on Eingana only has numbers as relates to the time that the supposed battles took place, and a general number as to the amount of ships damaged there (not an exact number, a general number).
So any other number you use, with out another source, are absolutely made up.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

The recovery after WW2 had a similar time-frame, though with outside help from the US.

Yes, convenient that the US was untouched by the war.

This time there may not be an untouched US to lend aid.

Another problem with your numbers is that you aren't considering that 1 square km may be easier to clean up than another.

How are you going to clean up the Amazon or any of the other vast expanses of wilderness on Earth? Areas that may have negligable populations, but still provide water (and food, though indirectly) to the settled areas.

The population of the Earth has NEARLY DOUBLED, and we are beginning to colonize other worlds.  Are you telling me that you believe in this future that every square inch of the earth has not even been exlpored in such a manner that we would have no way to navigate them to clean them up?
And for every 1 square kilometer of terrain that is more difficult to clean, there will be another one that will be incredibly easy and take less time and man power.  So in the end, it will all balance out.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

And I cite my generational post as evidence as to why levels of toxicity don't matter.  Once you reach the "toxic" level of lethality, that is it.

Over time more and more organisms will reach that level. Some will reach it a lot faster than others because of their size or body-chemistry.  

Sisterofshane wrote...

I was asking you to determine with certainty, beyond a reasonable doubt  that a battle the size of what you suppose will definitely happen over Earth.

I can't. I'm making an educated guess based on what we know about ME3. It involves a degree of meta-gaming since otherwise I'd have no reason to assume any major battles would take place over Earth at all.

It doesn't involve meta-gaming, it involves common sense.  Worst case scenario is just that, the worst case.  And there are an infinate number of outcomes ranging from best to worst.
So I say if this is that if you figure this is the worst thing that would ever happen, then I say, so we fight, and hopefully we'll be pleasantly surprised!

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Only you've already said that the Citadel is not a valid example as relating to our planet as it is in no way comparable to a planet.

Flip-Flop.

It's not flip-flopping.

The Citadel is not comparable as an environment being exposed to eezo since it is a sealed space sation.

However when it comes to problems and manpower and repair (or clean up in Earth's case) it IS a valid comparison.

And we don't know how much manpower was dedicated to the Citadel's renovations, and that took 5 years, Not bad, I say.

[Sisterofshane]

SJK93 wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

I allready adressed that. Orbital debris will tend to stay in orbit.

No, it will tend to fall back down to the planet.

If it's heading towards Earth at a very high velocity, then it will fall to Earth's surface, but I think it's safe to say that most of the debris from a destroyed ship will stay in orbit.

Also, any debris with zero velocity will have to be within Earth's gravity well for it to eventually be pulled back into the surface.  I think it's safe to say that most of our fighting won't be done there.

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

You have no hope.

Says the person advocating surrender...

[Sisterofshane]

Arijharn wrote...

I think Sandtrout has the right of it there. The fact is that it's the Reaper's and the spread of the contamination itself that makes the situation unorthodox, but generic clean up protocols wouldn't be that much different if multiplied in scale, but obviously the more well-to-do areas will be cleaned up first, and then sort of spreading out from there.

I find it exceptionally to borderline impossible however that we'd be be in a situation where every square km of Earth's surface will be covered, if only because prevalent wind patterns don't follow that pattern.

http://upload.wikime...ds_on_earth.png

As you can see in the picture above, there's very specific sort of patterns that wind follows, which means that you can get a pretty accurate picture of where to start and where to focus your energies upon, it also means that dust form element zero will fall in semi-predictable patterns meaning that depending on whether the Reapers are, its physically impossible for dust to fall into areas that don't match the prevalent wind patterns. If the Reapers are all concentrated in certain areas, then it will mean that it's impossible for dust form element zero to literally blanket the Earth.

Coincidentally, they follow the same charts when trying to chart possible spread of toxic substances present day -- such as with nuclear fallout.  Meaning that it's an already proven reliable means of people predicting where the contamination will be the worst.

[xXljoshlXx]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

You have no hope.

Says the person advocating surrender...

Yeah, that's the entire point, dummy.

Insults will get you nowhere

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

And we don't know how much manpower was dedicated to the Citadel's renovations, and that took 5 years, Not bad, I say.

How can you possibly judge that if you don't know how much manpower was dedicated to restoration?

Because I've seen govnernment projects in action before. Anything that takes only 5 years is ahead of scheduel:whistle:.

Really, though, if you're comparing the rebuilding aspect of the Citadel to Earth, then even with the limited scale of the citadel, which is essentially a major city, then 5 years is not that bad of a baseline. Even assuming that a lot of resources got pumped into the Citadel per square km of repairs that Earth isn't going to get, assuming a 500% increase in required time to rebuild earth is looking at only 25 years. That is an acceptable time frame to rebuild from an alien invasion, IMO.