questionposter

I suppose if I consider that the reaction happens over time, then that type of casing would help, but I was thinking it was more or less an instant process in which case it wouldn't really help. Theoretically, if you could store that much energy over time, the energy it would release in one instant would have a greater concentration than just using a bunch of nukes one at a time, but I always thought the fission reaction was rather quick.

The reaction of a nuclear bomb is what breaks the casing though, and it's not some kind of imaginably strong material like in this video game, it's designed to evaporate in those high of temperatures.

What is it being created from?

Don't those fields have planar-wave solutions though? Also, I would say right now that "wave-particle-duality" is the best description, but that doesn't mean particles can't have properties of waves or have wave-mechanics describe them. They either are the oscillation itself or they are the whole of an oscillating field. Not only that, but the only distinction of particles that I have seen so far as that one is a little solid sphere that has mass and spin, I haven't seen anything to suggest they can account for superposition and field cancellation without considering that a particle has oscillatory properties.

There's often questions about sci-fi stuff. But if you had some kind of casing, wouldn't the energy just radiate through that if the explosions happened pre-hand? Why not just detonate all of it at the same time without the casing? If you had a material that like, broke thermal dynamics and was incapable of absorbing thermal energy, then you could store all that energy inside it without losing any of it, otherwise even if it doesn't deteriorate from the over 5000 degrees of heat, energy will still transfer through it to the outside, not only that but maybe some gamma rays would escape as gamma rays are very small. I had a separate topic at one point for using degenerate matter to store massive amounts of energy, but so far the research is inconclusive and you might need to constantly expend energy to keep matter in a degenerate state. In short, it's improbable a bomb like that could be made. Usually sci-fi stories create an idea first, usually games don't spend a bunch of money to hire a scientist just to create futuristic bomb.

It's not cumbersome its just that you can't do it with 100% accuracy, ever. Not even Einstein could create this equation, and scientists definitely don't know for sure how the universe will end up, there's multiple theories.

If there isn't a singular equation to describe the entire universe, how can the universe be math?

Not everything can be described by the same set of mathematics though. Maybe if you can find a single equation to describe all of the universe, which even Einstein couldn't do, then I'll believe you.

If we don't know what nature is, then we cannot know it is math. Nature is it's own thing, and math is just the patterns of it that we observe.

Math is just the patterns we observe, there's nothing to suggest that math is reality and I can just find the number 2 floating around (I think one of the great philosophers like Plato or Aristotle also thought math was reality and that numbers could therefore exist on their own without human invention, and literally believed you could in some way find the true value of "2" just floating around somewhere). Math is reality in the sense that there are many of those patterns that exist in nature which change by specific amounts of something, but I don't think you can directly say any particular object is math.

Observations occur in our minds, therefore our observations cannot themselves be reality. Math is based off those observations: math cannot be reality. Also, how is making programs which themselves can create programs via evolution going? Last time I heard it would take 100 years for a program like that to make a game, but computers are probably faster by now.