Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[magikarcher]

What exactly do the tokens MELTING_POINT:### and BOILING_POINT:### do? I cannot find the answer on the wiki. Thanks.

[Dasleah]

... 

Taking a random shot in the dark here, but maybe - just maybe - they set the... gee, I dunno, the melting / boiling point for materials, taking a number within DF's native temperature range as an arguement?

Gosh, no, that's too obvious. I'm sure they do something like set the colour of Elves, or probably spawn a Dragon.

[ItchyBeard]

Gotta love vaguely amusing yet totally useless sarcastic replies.

I'm guessing the intent behind the original question was to determine the effects of melting and boiling, and not what the tokens themselves mean. Does a melting/boiling object generate clouds of choking doom? Is the effect different for different materials? Can you make enemies which blow up on death by making them drop materials with really low boiling points? Does material density affect boiling/melting time? etc...

magikarcher, the wiki should have some info regarding temperature... you may be able to use that to experiment (assuming someone else doesn't pipe up first with some useful information).

And when you find out... please add it to the wiki .

[Untelligent]

1. 10000 Dwarven Degrees (which I will refer to as D°) is freezing. From there, a change in D° is equal to a change in Farenheit Degrees (F°), so fifty degrees above freezing in F° (about 82°) is 10050 in D°. A quick overview of significant temperatures can be found here.

2. A boiling object generates clouds of freezing death, if it boils at a significantly low temperature (1 or 2, for example). I'm utilizing this in several ways in an upcoming overhaul of an old mod of mine. Not sure about melting things, though; I've always experimented with boiling things.

3. Enemies can blow up on death if they drop materials with really low boiling points. These are also featured in my upcoming mod.

4. Really dense materials cause the boiling cloud to last longer, but expand slower, if I remember correctly. That might have just been a really bad day for my CPU, though. Can't remember. I'll have to test that sometime.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I cannot really understand why DF temperatures increment in Fahrenheit. I always assumed it was Celsius. Then again, a homeotherm of what would be +50C should have probably made me suspicious.

[magikarcher]

Wow, thanks Dasleah! That was very very helpful. I was totally hoping that some sarcastic idiot would post a useless answer. You gave me a bonus too, you didn't even realize what my original question was!

Untelligent, thanks for the answers. I would imagine that something has to melt before it can boil, though.

[Neoskel]

Wow, thanks Dasleah! That was very very helpful. I was totally hoping that some sarcastic idiot would post a useless answer. You gave me a bonus too, you didn't even realize what my original question was!

Untelligent, thanks for the answers. I would imagine that something has to melt before it can boil, though.

Why can't they sublimate? A high enough sudden change in temperature could very well make it 'skip' the melting stage.

[i2amroy]

Wow, thanks Dasleah! That was very very helpful. I was totally hoping that some sarcastic idiot would post a useless answer. You gave me a bonus too, you didn't even realize what my original question was!

Untelligent, thanks for the answers. I would imagine that something has to melt before it can boil, though.

Why can't they sublimate? A high enough sudden change in temperature could very well make it 'skip' the melting stage.

They can, I have quite a few death dealing things that jump straight from normal to boiling, the one thing that it cannot do is change the order of states. (boiling then melting, or catching on fire without taking damage)

[Sean Mirrsen]

The way stuff is set in DF, you can easily create a material that first boils, then melts, then catches on fire. Of course, the boiling destroys the object, so it cannot even melt at that point.

[Sergius]

I cannot really understand why DF temperatures increment in Fahrenheit. I always assumed it was Celsius. Then again, a homeotherm of what would be +50C should have probably made me suspicious.

What I can't understand is why have such a high base number if absolute zero is -459ºF. That's like, 9541°D is as cold as it could ever get at the heat-death of the Universe (in fact, it would be slightly warmer than that).

Or am I way off base?

[ItchyBeard]

I cannot really understand why DF temperatures increment in Fahrenheit. I always assumed it was Celsius. Then again, a homeotherm of what would be +50C should have probably made me suspicious.

What I can't understand is why have such a high base number if absolute zero is -459ºF. That's like, 9541°D is as cold as it could ever get at the heat-death of the Universe (in fact, it would be slightly warmer than that).

Or am I way off base?

Maybe that's as cold as you can get... without magic ... though since absolute zero is meant to indicate the point where there is no heat energy left in the system and individual molecules are no longer moving, I'm not sure exactly what it would mean to have temperatures below that. You can't exactly have stuff move less than 'stopped'. With magic involved I guess you could ask interesting questions like "What temperature is love?" or "How cold is the soul of an undead?". I dunno... it's maaaagic .

Maybe it's to allow for a greater temperature differences for the purposes of melting/boiling? You would assume a material which boils at -459ºF would boil vigorously at 1000ºF. But what if you wanted something to boil vigorously at -459ºF (even if that doesn't make sense)?

Maybe it was a completely arbitrary offset?

[magikarcher]

Lets see, some nonsensical application of numbers, and blatantly useless scales... Hmm... Sounds dwarven to me! 

[Sean Mirrsen]

It's possible to go beyond absolute zero. There's usually no point in trying to measure that though. Once molecules are at absolute zero, they no longer move, and it's quite possible that the incoming energy that was always present around them actually kept their own energy contained, so once it is gone, the molecules and atoms may start to deteriorate, as they lose energy. They will still give off heat, at absolute zero, and will eventually cool down and fall apart, with most of their energy radiated away. It's less than absolute zero at that point, but it's not until the elemental particles themselves dissipate into nothingness that it becomes Absolutely cold.

I guess the "heat death of the universe" is pretty close to that description, although I remember it having to do something with entropy rather than abstract "energy pressure".

[Mohreb el Yasim]

It's possible to go beyond absolute zero. There's usually no point in trying to measure that though. Once molecules are at absolute zero, they no longer move, and it's quite possible that the incoming energy that was always present around them actually kept their own energy contained, so once it is gone, the molecules and atoms may start to deteriorate, as they lose energy. They will still give off heat, at absolute zero, and will eventually cool down and fall apart, with most of their energy radiated away. It's less than absolute zero at that point, but it's not until the elemental particles themselves dissipate into nothingness that it becomes Absolutely cold.

I guess the "heat death of the universe" is pretty close to that description, although I remember it having to do something with entropy rather than abstract "energy pressure".

why would moleculess fall apart if loosing more energi? i mean they are in a more stable state then if they would fall apart ... so the only thing i can see is if they loos energi when no more moving is there they will loos mass becouse that is their only energy available how rest ... so "cooling down" from 0°K(absolute zero from wich Kelvin comes)  with some kind of magic would say we do them dissapear ... it would like introducing anti matter and then take away the energy created by disapear of mattier/anti mattier ...
by the way sorry for the off topic it was just too interessante

[Sean Mirrsen]

No, since molecules and atoms are still made of something else, and that something else is moving, there is still energy radiating from the system. Unless at some point the universe consists of enclosed systems, completely shielded from everything, then if there's nothing to balance out the outgoing energy, whatever's left floating will radiate energy.

I, myself, believe that all matter in the universe is just energy manifested due to immense speed obtained when at one point the entirety of it exploded. The speed itself is more rotational than directional - the explosion would quickly fall in on itself due to unimaginable mass of the explosion, and the presumed internal limit to speed - it would be slowed, but not stopped, by the same gravity that caused it to collapse and blow in the first place. Anyways. All particles of matter are thus small pockets of energy spinning by themselves, having mass and gravity, and thus keeping the rotating system together, only by virtue of speed. Light is just a form of energy that we can see, and since it travels at light-limit speed, it obtains mass, and clumps together into particles that we see and call photons, but in every other respect it's just energy.

Anyways. Existential and origin-of-the-universe matters aside, is there anything else to discuss in the thread?