[Mika]

Regarding using rifles to shoot bullets at armor, I would guess it is more easier and cheaper to increase the penetration depth of the bullet than the protection depth of the armor. There aren't many mammals who would sport more than a thick hide. It is risky to generalize here, but evolution seems to have favored animals of our size that don't have built-in shields (at least so far). Probably has something to do with mobility.

Mika

[General Battuta]

Modern body armor isn't evolved, though. We can do a lot better than evolution, just because our solution search algorithms are far superior.

[Herra Tohtori]

We can do a lot better than evolution, just because our solution search algorithms are far superior.

No, no, no. Quicker, easier, more seductive.

Biological evolution is only "slow" because of long generations and the relatively low chances of positive mutations. Populations of fast-reproducing organisms evolve fast enough to evade vaccinations, develope rat poison resistance and otherwise keep the population alive. Also random factors like getting shot or run over by a car don't generally improve the bullet resistance of the population. However, widespread shootings might help a population to develope skills necessary for not getting shot (mainly, How Not To Be Seen and How To Get The First Shot), but not especially to survive bullet wounds any more than other wounds...

In theory, evolution is anything but inferior to other solution search algoirthms. But, for individual purposes during lifetime, other solutions are obviously needed since natural evolution only affects the species, not an individual. As far as the theory itself goes, evolution algorithms can actually solve some problems better and faster than traditional problem solving and design methods, since they can find combinations of optimal solutions amidst a mass of different choices based on relative performances of different designs.


Also, this thread is developing in rather unpredictable fashion.

[General Battuta]

We can do a lot better than evolution, just because our solution search algorithms are far superior.

No, no, no. Quicker, easier, more seductive.

Biological evolution is only "slow" because of long generations and the relatively low chances of positive mutations. Populations of fast-reproducing organisms evolve fast enough to evade vaccinations, develope rat poison resistance and otherwise keep the population alive. Also random factors like getting shot or run over by a car don't generally improve the bullet resistance of the population. However, widespread shootings might help a population to develope skills necessary for not getting shot (mainly, How Not To Be Seen and How To Get The First Shot), but not especially to survive bullet wounds any more than other wounds...

In theory, evolution is anything but inferior to other solution search algoirthms. But, for individual purposes during lifetime, other solutions are obviously needed since natural evolution only affects the species, not an individual. As far as the theory itself goes, evolution algorithms can actually solve some problems better and faster than traditional problem solving and design methods, since they can find combinations of optimal solutions amidst a mass of different choices based on relative performances of different designs.


Also, this thread is developing in rather unpredictable fashion.

Evolutionary algorithms definitely have their place, but in the end, they're greedy search algorithms, and that means they can only find local optimae. There's a reason we haven't evolved into careful custodians of the planetary ecosystem -- we have to use conscious planning for that.

I know what you're trying to say, but evolution is a clumsy and ineffective way of solving most problems.

[TrashMan]

Modern body armor isn't evolved, though. We can do a lot better than evolution, just because our solution search algorithms are far superior.

It hasn't? you haven't been keeping up, have you?

http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/dragon-skin.php

Check the Discovery Channel videos at the bottom.
AK-47, M-16.....even a friggin GRANADE didn't penetrate.

[Herra Tohtori]

Evolutionary algorithms definitely have their place, but in the end, they're greedy search algorithms, and that means they can only find local optimae. There's a reason we haven't evolved into careful custodians of the planetary ecosystem -- we have to use conscious planning for that.

Yeah, true. They explore all possibilities, of which only very small fraction has ever any chance of working. The Blind Watchmaker algorithm is an excellent example of this - the evolution of self-replicating watches that compete in accuracy has long periods of inactivity, and when a major breakthrough happens by chance, it spreads through population really fast, dominating over inferior fenotypes.

A sentient being trying to figure out a problem or designing something - be it anything - only searches for working solutions to begin with and has the advantage of creativity, imagination and all the cognitive abilities that the evolution of the species has inherited it with, and easily dismisses options that obviously won't work.

I know what you're trying to say, but evolution is a clumsy and ineffective way of solving most problems.

Aww. You didn't say "clumsy and random". How could you ever pass such an excellent possibility to quote some movie history.

 


TrashMan: I think Battuta meant that body armor isn't an evolving organism in the sense that it doesn't replicate (thank goodness) and doesn't mutate, but requires someone to design it and improve it. She didn't mean that body armor wouldn't have been improved...

[General Battuta]

TrashMan: I think Battuta meant that body armor isn't an evolving organism in the sense that it doesn't replicate (thank goodness) and doesn't mutate, but requires someone to design it and improve it. She didn't mean that body armor wouldn't have been improved...

Yup.

Also, Rian's the 'she'. I'm a 'he'. We shared an account for a while, which caused confusion.

[Herra Tohtori]

Rian's the 'she'. I'm a 'he'. We shared an account for a while, which caused confusion.

 

Duly noted.

[Akalabeth Angel]

It hasn't? you haven't been keeping up, have you?

http://www.pinnaclearmor.com/body-armor/dragon-skin.php

Check the Discovery Channel videos at the bottom.
AK-47, M-16.....even a friggin GRANADE didn't penetrate.

;

       I bet a knife would.
       

[Mars]

A knife in fact would not, although knives do pretty well against plain fiber, the ceramic plates are less forgiving. Plus, anyone wearing this is most likely armed, and most likely with something more long ranged than a knife.

[TrashMan]

Dragon Skin ain't cheap

what I wonder is why we don't see railguns/coilguns in the newer sci-fi's (BSG, Firefly), but rather the standard MP5's stuff.
Heck, you can build hommade coilguns right now. True, they don't have much power behind htem, due ot power/battery constraints, but I figure in the future that problem should be lifted

http://www.coilgun.ru/

[Vidmaster]

Firefly would have kicked even new BSG if they had the chance to develop it over the course of multiple Seasons. But, like always in life, the best always fall first.

[TrashMan]

Firefly would have kicked even new BSG if they had the chance to develop it over the course of multiple Seasons. But, like always in life, the best always fall first.

"Would have"? Unfinished as it is, it's already kicking it's butt.

[General Battuta]

Firefly would have kicked even new BSG if they had the chance to develop it over the course of multiple Seasons. But, like always in life, the best always fall first.

"Would have"? Unfinished as it is, it's already kicking it's butt.

Disagreed.

Anyway, on the coilgun issue, remember that buying modern firearms for props is very cheap, whereas building new ones has inauthentic and fragile results.

Technically the weapons on Firefly are all caseless, however.

Lastly, Firefly and BSG both go for a cinema verite feel, part of which requires having as few high-tech gadgets as possible.

[Mika]

[Tangent]
Regarding genetical algorithms, I personally tend to favor Differential Evolution over anything fancier. Reasons being that it is simple, easy to program and does not need fancy mathematics, and, in the end, simply works. Adding a local optimizer like Conjugate Gradients or Newton's iteration will act as "brains". The other (though less stabile) algorithm I came fond of is SPSA, again due to simplicity and because it is quite easy to program.

Most likely, anything fancier algorithms simply take longer to program (less time to optimize) and also tend to be more error prone, while offering not so much performance improvements to make them worthwile. Or at least in my cases.
[/Tangent]

Speaking of body armor, I meant that there has been a lot of time available for evolution in the world, and it seems that the most carnivorous animals (that most likely also fight and receive injuries) do not have armor, but rely instead on mobility or on surprise. I don't know if this is relevant, but same applied when Mongols invaded half the Europe. They simply had a better bow and relied on mobility, while Europeans were stuck inside city walls.

I didn't mean that the body armor is useless or not worthwile. The thing has probably saved countless of lives, and even I were lucky to wear one in the army - during winter, that is. But it does have its limitations. While body armors develop, I'm wonder when we are starting to see lead tipped or depleted uranium tipped bullets in the service - or some other fancy stuff like extremely pointy drilling heads. If that doesn't work make that 7.62 mm rifle a 9 mm rifle. The other guy has to carry more armor if he wants to stop the bullets, and most likely the weight increase by bullets and larger rifle is less than the thicker armor needed to stop them. Also, shock experienced by getting hit by a bullet while wearing armor is also something. While the soldier most likely stays alive, he stops for a while.

Depends actually on what is being done. If it is attack, heavy armor is a problem. If patrolling and keeping peace (where mobility is not required that much), why not?

Mika

[MR_T3D]

here's a thought:
What if they are using coil-based guns, and they merely LOOK like normal guns, as they figure they look the best.

[General Battuta]

here's a thought:
What if they are using coil-based guns, and they merely LOOK like normal guns, as they figure they look the best.

The showrunners said they were caseless, I believe.

[Grizzly]

Firefly would have kicked even new BSG if they had the chance to develop it over the course of multiple Seasons. But, like always in life, the best always fall first.

"Would have"? Unfinished as it is, it's already kicking it's butt.

Under Sci-Fi freaks, yes.
Under General population (like BSG...): No, not really.

[TrashMan]

Furefly >> BSG.

Better actors, better characters, better plot and better camera work

[Cyker]

But but but what about the homing laser pistol in the Space Brothel episode!!