Post #1163546
2026-04-15 02:09 UTC
Replies (9)
-
@capotej@mastodon.social 2026-04-15 02:24
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net this is a hall of famer
-
@stibbons@s.scintilla.social 2026-04-15 02:29
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net Ah, the Kerbal lament.
-
@coriander@elekk.xyz 2026-04-15 03:50
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net Jokes I only understand thanks to Kerbal
-
@syn@plasmatrap.com 2026-04-15 05:35
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net wait, what's the original message here
-
@MorningSong@weirder.earth 2026-04-15 07:25
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net we must rise up and defeat the tyranny of the rocket equation
-
@AngelicAura@transfem.social 2026-04-15 08:25
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net That's just how I play kerbal space program I don't see the problem????
-
@chloeraccoon@mastodonapp.uk 2026-04-15 11:04
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net @patterfloof@meow.social "so how do you play kerbal space program....?"
-
@tsturm@famichiki.jp 2026-04-15 13:25
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net @dpnash@c.im 100% KSP… 😂
-
@dpnash@c.im 2026-04-15 16:35
@bonzoesc@m.bonzoesc.net Reminds me of a time when I half-jokingly critiqued the phrase “it’s not rocket science” to mean “it’s not complex”. I argued rocket science was really pretty simple (TL;DR version: “conservation of momentum”) and the really hard part was rocket engineering (finding ways to use that concept that didn’t explode, incinerate the crew, or poison half the planet on the way up). Someone brought up Tsiolkovski’s rocket equation as a counterexample; it’s a first principle that’s not immediately visible from conservation of momentum (though of course it’s part of the derivation of the equation). Ok, fair, but as KSP enthusiasts can attest to: getting a usable spacecraft within the constraints of the rocket equation takes a lot of rocket engineering as well.