# Thread: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

1. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Since when has that ever stopped you? Were you going to nudify Q, or the Milkman?
Well, this is the first time it's come up with avatars as far as I remember.

And, just for the record, I was planning it with Q.

2. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

So a handful of Pikalites, say 30, can produce about 27.5 GW? For an average .917 GW per Pikalite? That seems like a lot for a being that has to continue trying to live as well. And living things need to eat as well...

Of course, if they can only produce .917 GW each, 1 second of energy isn't that useful I'd think.

Keris, 1 Pikalite = .15 Dol or is it 1 Dol = .15 Pikalite? And were'd you get that from?

3. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by memnarch
Keris, 1 Pikalite = .15 Dol or is it 1 Dol = .15 Pikalite? And were'd you get that from?
My phrasing was messed up, as was my interpretation of my hastily scrawled figures. I meant 1 Pikalite = 4 Dol.
A handful is usually ≈5 (the number of digits on one hand). That would put it at 5.5 Dol per Pikalite, but I decided to err on the side of caution and go for 4 Dol per Pikalite. That means 1 Pikalite is about 0.15 of the total 27.5, which is where my erroneous figure came from.

This puts the output of each Pikalite at a very impressive 4GW.

4. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
My phrasing was messed up, as was my interpretation of my hastily scrawled figures. I meant 1 Pikalite = 4 Dol.
A handful is usually ≈5 (the number of digits on one hand). That would put it at 5.5 Dol per Pikalite, but I decided to err on the side of caution and go for 4 Dol per Pikalite. That means 1 Pikalite is about 0.15 of the total 27.5, which is where my erroneous figure came from.

This puts the output of each Pikalite at a very impressive 4GW.
Heh, now Keris is only half evil. Redemption is a wonderful thing. Or so I'm told.
(his post number is 333, although half evil would actually be 308)

5. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Actually, several weapons in Star Wars are canonically lasers, not blasters. But as they operate by the same visual effects, so either the galaxy far, far away has different physical laws, or the so called "lasers" are merely blasters with the plasma excited by an internal laser.
The latter is correct.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, the "noise in space" the ship's sensors add to aid pilot reactions.

6. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by The Gremlin
Heh, now Keris is only half evil. Redemption is a wonderful thing. Or so I'm told.
(his post number is 333, although half evil would actually be 308)
Yeah, as you might recall, I ran into... difficulties last time when attempting to attain true evil status. And odds are, the № of the Beast is actually 666. The earliest records we have (Irenaeus in the 2nd century) says it's 666, while the 3rd century manuscripts say 616.

Originally Posted by Squark
The latter is correct.
If you have a source to cite, then go tell Wookiepedia! That's where I got that from. Although I profess knowledge of a variety of subjects, I am, possibly surprisingly, not a devotee of the Star Wars canon.
Originally Posted by Squark
Oh, and in case you were wondering, the "noise in space" the ship's sensors add to aid pilot reactions.
That's such common knowledge it's mentioned on TV tropes.

7. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Yeah, as you might recall, I ran into... difficulties last time when attempting to attain true evil status. And odds are, the № of the Beast is actually 666. The earliest records we have (Irenaeus in the 2nd century) says it's 666, while the 3rd century manuscripts say 616.

If you have a source to cite, then go tell Wookiepedia! That's where I got that from. Although I profess knowledge of a variety of subjects, I am, possibly surprisingly, not a devotee of the Star Wars canon.

That's such common knowledge it's mentioned on TV tropes.
I THINK one of the Old Star Wars CCG's turbolaser cards had some lore text that mentioned it fired ionized gas, but I don't know if I even have the card any more, or if I traded it to a friend back when they still made the game.

8. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Yeah, as you might recall, I ran into... difficulties last time when attempting to attain true evil status. And odds are, the № of the Beast is actually 666. The earliest records we have (Irenaeus in the 2nd century) says it's 666, while the 3rd century manuscripts say 616.
Ahem:
Originally Posted by Keris's Own Preferred Weapon, Wikipedia
In 2005, however, a fragment of papyrus 115 was revealed, containing the earliest known version of that part of the Book of Revelation discussing the Number of the Beast. It gave the number as 616, suggesting that this may have been the original.
Woo! I'm invisible!

9. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
My phrasing was messed up, as was my interpretation of my hastily scrawled figures. I meant 1 Pikalite = 4 Dol.
A handful is usually ≈5 (the number of digits on one hand). That would put it at 5.5 Dol per Pikalite, but I decided to err on the side of caution and go for 4 Dol per Pikalite. That means 1 Pikalite is about 0.15 of the total 27.5, which is where my erroneous figure came from.

This puts the output of each Pikalite at a very impressive 4GW.
Ok then, I use 4 GW. I'm going use Stoichiometry for convertions. Barrel of Oil Equivalent is the amount of energy a barrel of crude oil can produce. (42 USA gallons) Work in spoilers.

Spoiler
{table]
4 GW
|
10^9 W
|
1 J/s
|
1 kJ
|
1 BTU
|
Barrel of Oil Equivalent
1
|
1 GW
|
1 W
|
10^3 J
|
1.06 kJ
|
5.8*10^6 BTU
[/table]

Canceling units.
Spoiler

{table]
4 GW
|
10^9 W
|
1 J/s
|
1 kJ
|
1 BTU
|
Barrel of Oil Equivalent
1
|
1 GW
|
1 W
|
10^3 J
|
1.06 kJ
|
5.8*10^6 BTU
[/table]

We are left with .65 Barrel of Oil Equivalents per second. That's 1 Pikalite producing the same amount of energy as 27.3 gallons of crude oil in one second. That is a tremendous amount of energy for something that small, especially if it can sustain that output.

That also raises the question of why not just use ~80 Pikalites to run their experiment, what ever it is
Note, I'm just doing this for fun and to be rid of boredom. ;)

10. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Yeah, forgive me, but that just doesn't sound right to me either, Keris...

EDIT: Off-topic, is anyone else tracking the development of TOR?. The waiting is already starting to get to me, and I've only been tracking it for a few days. I'm Korin Hyvek on the boards (Incidently, that's the name of my current avatar, and the smuggler I hope to create once the game comes out).

ON yet another off-topic train of thought, does anyone else play the Star Wars Roleplaying game?

11. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by The Gremlin
Ahem: Woo! I'm invisible!
Ahem yourself, invisible boy.
Originally Posted by From the writings of Irenaeus; second century
[John] says also: "And he will cause a mark [to be put] in the forehead and in the right hand, that no one may be able to buy or sell, unless he who has the mark of the name of the beast or the number of his name; and the number is six hundred and sixty-six,"
[...]
Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies [of the Apocalypse], and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]; while reason also leads us to conclude that the number of the name of the beast, [if reckoned] according to the Greek mode of calculation by the [value of] the letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred and sixty and six.
Originally Posted by National Geographic News: April 25, 2005
[On the subject of reading the documents you mentioned]
The latest volume includes details of fragments showing third- and fourth-century versions of the Book of Revelations. Intriguingly, the number assigned to "the Beast" of Revelations isn't the usual 666, but 616.
Third- and fourth-century versions are not older than the second century versions. Ergo, the older one is 666.

Originally Posted by memnarch
We are left with .65 Barrel of Oil Equivalents per second. That's 1 Pikalite producing the same amount of energy as 27.3 gallons of crude oil in one second. That is a tremendous amount of energy for something that small, especially if it can sustain that output.

That also raises the question of why not just use ~80 Pikalites to run their experiment, what ever it is.
Yeah, it looks like Lying goofed somewhere there. He should probably shift the decimal point left a couple of digits in the last panel.

12. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by memnarch
Ok then, I use 4 GW. I'm going use Stoichiometry for convertions. Barrel of Oil Equivalent is the amount of energy a barrel of crude oil can produce. (42 USA gallons) Work in spoilers.

Spoiler
{table]
4 GW
|
10^9 W
|
1 J/s
|
1 kJ
|
1 BTU
|
Barrel of Oil Equivalent
1
|
1 GW
|
1 W
|
10^3 J
|
1.06 kJ
|
5.8*10^6 BTU
[/table]

Canceling units.
Spoiler

{table]
4 GW
|
10^9 W
|
1 J/s
|
1 kJ
|
1 BTU
|
Barrel of Oil Equivalent
1
|
1 GW
|
1 W
|
10^3 J
|
1.06 kJ
|
5.8*10^6 BTU
[/table]

We are left with .65 Barrel of Oil Equivalents per second. That's 1 Pikalite producing the same amount of energy as 27.3 gallons of crude oil in one second. That is a tremendous amount of energy for something that small, especially if it can sustain that output.

That also raises the question of why not just use ~80 Pikalites to run their experiment, what ever it is
Note, I'm just doing this for fun and to be rid of boredom. ;)
It's a world where you can reconstruct a mountain by saying a word but small yellow guys aren't allowed to produce a lot of energy? (it could be their form of magic you know) besides using your own people as a power source when you can use another method is cruel (I assume they where in a hurry and thus couldn't wait for the last Dol to be available by other methods in the comic)

13. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

What's the word that allows you to reconstruct a mountain?

Also, how do you know it's cruel? If it is indeed something natural to the Pikalites, why would it hurt them when they produce electricity?

14. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Magic has physics too, after all...

To be honest, though, pikalites generating that much from what appear to be entirely biological means does not make sense, and ruins my willing suspense of disbelief

Originally Posted by memnarch
What's the word that allows you to reconstruct a mountain?

Also, how do you know it's cruel? If it is indeed something natural to the Pikalites, why would it hurt them when they produce electricity?
Straining to produce as much as possible could, but otherwise, no it shouldn't.

15. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Hey guys, did you know the world is going to end in three years? Well I was just surfing youtube, the single most reliable source of news on the future and it's all over there. Well I guess it's been a great time with you. Sad it had to end.

16. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Hey guys, did you know the world is going to end in three years? Well I was just surfing youtube, the single most reliable source of news on the future and it's all over there. Well I guess it's been a great time with you. Sad it had to end.
Meh. I'll be dead by then either way.

When I meet one of you in the afterlife, tell me all about it.

17. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by the_Q
Meh. I'll be dead by then either way.

When I meet one of you in the afterlife, tell me all about it.
They say there will be a red planet named broccoli passing by making everything die and at the same time the solar system will align the milkyway's equator and that will cause us to get sucked into the black hole in the galactic center.

So it will probably be very painful or not.

18. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Hey guys, did you know the world is going to end in three years? Well I was just surfing youtube, the single most reliable source of news on the future and it's all over there. Well I guess it's been a great time with you. Sad it had to end.
I don't believe it, certain religious organisations have announced the end of the world at least thrice last century (they announced it would happen in times in that century too) and it hasn't happened yet.

Yeah I'm saying I don't believe i it so it will happen, yay reverse psychology and bad logic!

Anyway, I think the picalites could get their power from the same source as mages do.

19. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keveak
I don't believe it, certain religious organisations have announced the end of the world at least thrice last century (they announced it would happen in times in that century too) and it hasn't happened yet.

Yeah I'm saying I don't believe i it so it will happen, yay reverse psychology and bad logic!

Anyway, I think the picalites could get their power from the same source as mages do.
What dont you remember, when human civilization good wiped out by a computer virus at the start of the year 2000, and then how the antichrist killed us all at the 6th of june 2006?

20. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

What dont you remember, when human civilization good wiped out by a computer virus at the start of the year 2000, and then how the antichrist killed us all at the 6th of june 2006?
That musta been while I was trapped in that cave, but it would explain the lack of living people around here.

<_<
>_>
But not the feeling of being watched and why this computer still wo.........

21. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

What dont you remember, when human civilization good wiped out by a computer virus at the start of the year 2000, and then how the antichrist killed us all at the 6th of june 2006?
I think I remember the last one. He had a bad toupée, and seemed nervous. But he was trying hard, and was a nice bloke.

22. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
I think I remember the last one. He had a bad toupée, and seemed nervous. But he was trying hard, and was a nice bloke.
Yeah. They don't make Apocalypses like they used to. I mean, what do you say when a guy summons Middle Age, Drunken Scuffle, Just A Cold, and I'm Hungry Let's Get Pizza. You know he's trying, but it's just no the same.

23. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
I think I remember the last one. He had a bad toupée, and seemed nervous. But he was trying hard, and was a nice bloke.
But if he killed you all twenty years ago then how can you post here

It's coming. Hide! It's coming...

24. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keveak
But if he killed you all twenty years ago then how can you post here

It's coming. Hide! It's coming...
Nono that was three years ago.

And well we got better.

25. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Nono that was three years ago.

And well we got better.
You think it's 2009 after Christ? But that means They captured you all in the sick illusion of a twisted reality while sacrificing you one by one to their cruel gods! Get out when you can!!

Oh no, it found me, I must get away! See ya.

26. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Yeah, it looks like Lying goofed somewhere there. He should probably shift the decimal point left a couple of digits in the last panel.
Issue: You're assuming that your definition of "handful" is the same as that of the Pikalites.

Given their population figures it's possible their "handful" slang term is actually equivalent to a hundred or more Pikalites.

Even if "handful" means a literal handful of Pikalites, it's still probably more than 5, especially since they're talking to a Medium-sized creature and are probably Small or Tiny-sized creatures themselves.

27. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Lyinginbedmon
Issue: You're assuming that your definition of "handful" is the same as that of the Pikalites.

Given their population figures it's possible their "handful" slang term is actually equivalent to a hundred or more Pikalites.

Even if "handful" means a literal handful of Pikalites, it's still probably more than 5, especially since they're talking to a Medium-sized creature and are probably Small or Tiny-sized creatures themselves.
tiny, compared to the size of kobolds and other small sized creatures that came across FFF, ABR and generally everything OotS style so far.

28. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

And well we got better.
I think you offically fail now.

29. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Yeah, it is indeed an epic fail.

30. ## Re: Avatar Battle Royale Discussion Thread XXIV: What is this "Haste" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Keris Rain
Ahem yourself, invisible boy.

Third- and fourth-century versions are not older than the second century versions. Ergo, the older one is 666.
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
In 2005, however, a fragment of papyrus 115 was revealed, containing the earliest known version of that part of the Book of Revelation discussing the Number of the Beast. It gave the number as 616, suggesting that this may have been the original.
I think your info is messed up, Vamp Boy.
/\/\Join the club. Stupid pandas...

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•