As far as I know, the jjaro tech could only fold mass AWAY, not add it :-p

Just used to my Bungie being hard sci fi.

Technically it could compress the planet which would decrease r which would increase the effects of gravity on the surface of the planet.

You could do that too, but size is another one of those key defining characteristics of a planet like mass, composition, layers, and orbit (though you can still apply what I said in my other post).
If you did a little of both-- add mass and reduce size-- you could have something the size of the planet or moon as it is but with more gravity. If you just added to the outside and squeezed, though, you'd lose all the surface features even more definitely than if you just covered them with added mass. If you could remove the outer layer of the planet, add mass to the inside, and then reapply the top later and squeeze, it would look more like its old self, and even more if you removed the top, added mass, squeezed, and then put the top layer back on.

Edge Online has an interview with Chris Barrett about creating a new world. Go give it a read!

I'd really like to know what kind of space age suit is going to let you withstand 900°F and 90 atmospheres of pressure!

As an aside, will we be able to jump really high on mars?

Our current best understanding is that the various planets of the Solar System were terraformed for us by The Traveler. So, no special suit required, and no ultra-long jumping on Mars… Unless our current best understanding is incomplete or wrong…

How do you terraform more mass onto a Planet? You should still be able to high jump on Mars, shouldn't you?

How do you alter the orbit of Jupiter, make Mercury livable enough that skyscrapers can be built in full view of the sun, or create some kind of shield that keeps a single city safe from multiple enemy races? If The Traveler did all those why is adding mass to a planet out of the question?

Just adding mass would work too and it might be easier than other ways, but then these planets and moons wouldn't really be the same-- some defining characteristics of Mars, for example, are its size and mass, and that mass determines what its atmosphere is like, and there are a bunch of things that lead on like that. Then again, you could say the same for Venus and its atmosphere, which would realistically have to be changed to make the planet livable (and definitely not its mass, incidentally, it has just over 90% as much mass as Earth).

As an aside, will we be able to jump really high on mars?

Our current best understanding is that the various planets of the Solar System were terraformed for us by The Traveler. So, no special suit required, and no ultra-long jumping on Mars… Unless our current best understanding is incomplete or wrong…

well, we know it's incomplete, and IDK why the Traveler, in terraforming these places, would change the gravity (I mean, there's a reason or two, but I have no idea how it would come to that decision)

Eh, we suspect it's incomplete. Maybe our (my) current understanding is exactly correct.

There are undoubtedly a lot of things we don't know about everything the Destinyverse.

As to the Traveler, if it was terraforming the planets to better suit us then altering the gravity, which would be beneficial to us, might have been one of its many changes.

Cody has a point though. I was thinking of gravity plating like you'd find in most sci-fi spaceships, but now I'm thinking what about building basements and bunkers and in-ground pools, what about excavation, what about mining, what about examining the soil and rock for scientific reasons, what about digging a hole just because we feel like it? Whatever increases the gravity would have to be deeper than we could ever dig, or at least deeper than we would ever need or want to dig, to protect it, and even then what about tectonic and volcanic action and what about meteors? That's if it is or works like gravity plating though, they could, especially with this "mythic sci-fi" universe, have it be a protected machine on the surface or in orbit or even projected by the Traveler itself somehow. It sounds like a lot of work that isn't strictly necessary though.

I thought Outskirts and Metropolis were great. The Halo 3 levels were all right too. I differ on New Mombassa in ODST. It didn't feel like a real, live city to me, but that was my only complaint. It felt more like a fortress than a city, if that makes sense.

I mean, I guess that was partly why I liked it. It was obviously not 'living' anymore, and the nighttime hub level emphasized that fact. The feeling of abandonment was pretty strong, and certain familiar props, like cars, malfunctioning ticket booths, etc, made it feel like a place that used to be alive, especially when taken together with the audio recordings. To me, most of the feeling of unreality came from all the big doors separating areas, which I imagine was partly because of technical limitations. But those can be explained away by the whole lockdown thing.

I thought Outskirts and Metropolis were great. The Halo 3 levels were all right too. I differ on New Mombassa in ODST. It didn't feel like a real, live city to me, but that was my only complaint. It felt more like a fortress than a city, if that makes sense.

Interestingly Bungie talked about it feeling like a fortress. They said it was done deliberately to emphasize the fact that humans had been preparing for an invasion of Earth for a very long time. That doesn't address if you liked the way it was or not, but interesting non the less.

It didn't feel like a real, live city to me, but that was my only complaint. It felt more like a fortress than a city, if that makes sense.

In my headcanon, it only looks that way because it is both in full lockdown and completely evacuated.

In mathematical terms, the gravitational pull outside of the body in question is a function of the mass/(distance from mass center^2), so the smaller the radius, the smaller the distance from the center of mass, the greater the pull.

ZackDark speaks the truth.

A few minor clarifications... the amount of gravitational force exerted by a given point of mass is proportional to (the mass) / (the distance from that point)^2. For real objects (i.e. not point masses), the gravitational force is a combination of the forces exerted by a bunch of points distributed about you. For example, if a mountain were massive enough and you were standing near it, it could exert a non-negligible gravitational force on you that pulled you slightly sideways.

So, if the radius gets really small then unless the object is spherical (often not the case for things like asteroids) the gravitational force may not necessarily go up in the direction you might expect.

You see, with a smaller radius (assuming you are at the surface) the gravity would indeed be greater. Take black holes for one. They have pretty much the same mass it had when it was a dying star (not exactly the same, but definitely not 10 times more), yet it's only trouble when it's a black hole and not when it's a dying star. Why's that? Because it has a very much so reduced radius.

In mathematical terms, the gravitational pull outside of the body in question is a function of the mass/(distance from mass center^2), so the smaller the radius, the smaller the distance from the center of mass, the greater the pull.

If they don't want to change gravity for gameplay reasons, fine, but explanations like that are so far-fetched that I would rather just go without them at all.

You can't inject HTML into a post on the DBO forum like you can on HBO. Security and all that. Embedding YouTube videos is done through a forum shortcut tag:

[youtube]YouTube-Video-ID[/youtube]

Or you can use the more complex version, as documented by Claude.

I've updated your first post to have the embed.

Thanks! I'll have to keep that in mind from now on.

[youtube]YouTube-Video-ID[/youtube]

Or you can use the more complex version, as documented by Claude.

I've updated your first post to have the embed.