advanced math/physics in DnD [Archive] - Wizards Community

advanced math/physics in DnD [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Aricomus
05-15-07, 08:23 PM I was just wondering...

Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things.

Thanks in advance
Lina_Inverse
05-15-07, 08:23 PM Physics do not exist in D&D.
kentonblack
05-15-07, 08:30 PM specifically, the DMG says that theyre ignored for "ease of play". like momentum allowing you to move square by square with a speed 100 monk....or potential energy vs density of materials and the fact that giants dont have iron bones.

really, how does two tons stand on two feet?
CryoSilver
05-15-07, 08:32 PM They exist if you want them to. Physics probably work a little differently, but math is as much there as you want it to be.
Deep Blue 9000
05-15-07, 08:38 PM I was just wondering...

Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things.

Thanks in advance

Are you asking if anyone in D&D understand advanced science or whether advanced science works at all in the D&D world?
Tempest Stormwind
05-15-07, 08:39 PM I think he means if people, in the D&D world, study physics or math, and if so, to what level?

This is completely campaign-dependent, and undoubtedly shaped by magic.

For instance, looking at Sharn, House Cannith, and anything that comes out of Zilargo, I can tell that people in Eberron know a thing or two about architecture and engineering. However, Sharn's in a manifest zone that enhances flying magic, House Cannith is masterful at building magical devices, and the gnomes are proficient at binding elementals to do their bidding.

Magic is another force in Eberron, and as a result some of the more esoteric developments of real-world physics just aren't necessary. Why bother developing airfoil dynamics and the internal combustion engine (or its equivalent) when soarwood and a bound elemental do the same job and you already know the basics behind the magic?

Math is something else altogether. There's implications that advanced geometric theories exist in Greyhawk at least (the Geometer PrC), and the existence of orreries and star charts suggest a decent understanding of celestial mechanics (which we nowadays call "astrophysics"), plus every campaign world has a calendar and virtually every one has kingdoms with census data, tax systems, and similar. It's difficult to predict where magic and math intersect, or if magic is even bound by logical rules (it clearly violates the physical laws of thermodynamics!), but this is something you can flesh out in your games to boot.

I know that my physics degree's provided me with no end of buzzwords to transmute into arcanobabble for my wizard. No, I have no idea what Relingoff's Reversal is as it pertains to static abjuration fields, nor could I derive it on the back of an envelope, but it sure sounds impressive, doesn't it?
Aricomus
05-15-07, 09:59 PM Thanks for all your input. The main reason I asked the question was because I had a rough idea about a player who deals with combat in an incredibly analytical and mathmatical manner. I was also wondering what class would be best for this....:plotting:
Dog_As_A_Devil_Deified
05-15-07, 10:25 PM From an historical perspective, both modern calculus and mechanics are attributed to Sir Isaac Newton, during the 17th century. Some of their roots come from earlier periods, especially in mechanics (though the modern roots of mechanics probably stem from Kepler and Galileo—starting in the mid- to late-16th century).

So they approach the right period, though they are a little later than what I personally tend to think of as the "D&D period". Nothing prevents you from implementing them though.
Domriso
05-15-07, 10:37 PM In my campaign I set it up that physics still work (at least in the storytelling aspect; still haven't quite figured out the mechanical aspect) but that magic works under a different set of rules. That way they can interact and create spastic results, on occasion.

Now that I look at it, it really doesn't make much sense when I put it in writing, but that's still what I did.
Sarella Starshine
05-16-07, 07:47 AM Thanks for all your input. The main reason I asked the question was because I had a rough idea about a player who deals with combat in an incredibly analytical and mathmatical manner. I was also wondering what class would be best for this....:plotting:

Just about any class can work for that if you really think about it. There is no reason that a fighter-type would be less able to do so than a caster-type (in fact, could be argued that a fighter-type would prob be trained to do so).

I can assume that math and such would be about the same as it is here. Not sure that it would go higher than algebra or not though. (Calculus was created to help with the math side of the physical laws that Newton was working on (some of the more thornier issues about the exact mathematical nature of gravity and the like could not be written up using just algebra).) Physics on the other hand.. that may look nothing like our physics just because they would have to account for magic as a normal effect, and magic tells our real world physics to shut up and sit down quite frequently. For the other sciences, chemisrty would easily become alchemy, astronomy be astrology, etc.
StormKnight
05-16-07, 11:23 AM really, how does two tons stand on two feet?
In a not terribly different way from how 7 tons stands on two feet. (About the weight that scientists estimate a T. Rex at).
StoneStokes
05-19-07, 02:13 AM I can assume that math and such would be about the same as it is here. Not sure that it would go higher than algebra or not though. (Calculus was created to help with the math side of the physical laws that Newton was working on (some of the more thornier issues about the exact mathematical nature of gravity and the like could not be written up using just algebra).) ...

I think that one might find mathematicians studying Calculus in some D&D campaign worlds.

It should be noted that Calculus was nearly discovered by Archimedes ca. 250 BC. He had a notion of both Limits and Definite Integrals (though he named them differently than our modern terminology), key ideas in Calculus, and was motivated by geometry, not physics. Had he not been killed by Roman soldiers at the early age of 70 years, we may have had Calculus 2000 years earlier than we did.

It should also be noted that Fermat had postulated and proven several theorems in Calculus (in particular on optimization, the classic 1st-semester problem) about half a century before Newton "created" Calculus, motivated by geometry not physics.

Just a couple of historical "fun-facts."
Optimized_Commoner
05-19-07, 03:18 AM In my world I assume that there is a set of scientific laws, however rather than "being told to sit down and shut up" by magic, are the method by which magic works. While these scientific laws produce a world that looks vaguely similar to our own, (gravity falls downwards, etc), they are actually entirely different.

Mathematics would be similar yet have certain differences as well once you get past basic addition, subtraction, etc.
Dog_As_A_Devil_Deified
05-19-07, 08:37 AM In my world I assume that there is a set of scientific laws, however rather than "being told to sit down and shut up" by magic, are the method by which magic works. While these scientific laws produce a world that looks vaguely similar to our own, (gravity falls downwards, etc), they are actually entirely different.

Mathematics would be similar yet have certain differences as well once you get past basic addition, subtraction, etc.

I agree. In my game world

∫ 1/(cabin) d(cabin)

= Natural log (cabin) + C

= houseboat
SeptimusMagistos
05-19-07, 01:05 PM Due to presence of extra fundamental forces in DnD, physics would be more complex than what we're used to.
Cthulhu3125
05-19-07, 01:59 PM I agree. In my game world

∫ 1/(cabin) d(cabin)

= Natural log (cabin) + C

= houseboat

This post wins.
FloppyLlama
05-19-07, 02:42 PM From an historical perspective, both modern calculus and mechanics are attributed to Sir Isaac Newton

And should also be attributed to Gottfried Leibniz. In fact, IIRC, calculus students nowadays use Leibniz's notation.
Edymnion
05-19-07, 03:02 PM I was just wondering...

Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things.

Thanks in advanceAs we know them today? No, didn't exist. I mean, the very idea of using a zero in decimals didn't reach Europe until 1200 AD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number)

However, its D&D. Just have a character take ranks in Knowledge (Mathematics) and assign DCs to the calculations and roll the dice to see if your character can figure it out or not.
It should be noted that Calculus was nearly discovered by Archimedes ca. 250 BC. He had a notion of both Limits and Definite Integrals (though he named them differently than our modern terminology), key ideas in Calculus, and was motivated by geometry, not physics. Had he not been killed by Roman soldiers at the early age of 70 years, we may have had Calculus 2000 years earlier than we did.

It should also be noted that Fermat had postulated and proven several theorems in Calculus (in particular on optimization, the classic 1st-semester problem) about half a century before Newton "created" Calculus, motivated by geometry not physics.

Just a couple of historical "fun-facts."Or that the steam engine was *ALMOST* invented 2000 years ago. They had everything they needed, including a working steam powered rotation device. If they had just put a pully and a belt drive on it, they would have had a steam engine.

But they didn't.

History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world.
Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't.
ORC_Paradox
05-19-07, 03:24 PM History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world.
Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't.

Like THAC0.

:devil:

/runs for his life
Tempest Stormwind
05-19-07, 03:27 PM And should also be attributed to Gottfried Leibniz. In fact, IIRC, calculus students nowadays use Leibniz's notation.

We tend to, correct, unless we're teaching calculus to people who don't intend to use it for higher mathematics, such as if we're teaching it in high school (the basics of differentiation and integration are remarkably applicable to many real-world scenarios, even if you don't go into the depths of higher mathematics). Additionally, a variant on Newton's notation is used by physicists, since we deal with entirely too many variables and this variant notation is extremely compact (an associate of mine recently finished his doctoral thesis. He used up every single uppercase and lowercase letter in both the Roman (English) and Greek alphabets for various variables and expressions, and still had more. He ended up using Hebrew, since he *also* needed subscripts to track his work. I say we need to use a variant because even Newton's basic derivative symbol, the prime tick ('), has a specific meaning in physics ("after" or "in another reference frame").).

That said, for most of our work -- including nearly all physics up to that point, and EVEN some of the physics AT that point (i.e. any non-time derivative) -- we tend to use Lebniz' notation over Newton's.
StoneStokes
05-19-07, 06:06 PM Or that the steam engine was *ALMOST* invented 2000 years ago. They had everything they needed, including a working steam powered rotation device. If they had just put a pully and a belt drive on it, they would have had a steam engine.

But they didn't.

History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world.
Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't.

I should have been more precise. Archimedes almost had discovered a complete calculus. He DID discover key ideas in calculus. Ideas that are now accredited to Newton. Archimedes discovered infintesimals, infinite series, limits, and a variation of Riemann sums. But you suggest that we should discount all of this because he didn't have the modern, Cauchy-Weierstrauss, definition of limit?

I'm not suggesting that Newton should not get due credit. But it is ridiculous to say, "Nope, not the entire Calculus, so it doesn't count." By that reasoning, Newton would get no credit for gravity, as his theory fails to account for relativistic effects. And neither would Einstein get credit because Relativity fails to hold up under sub-atomic scrutiny, and predicts a much slower (by one hundred orders of magnitude) expansion of the universe than what is observed.

Moreover, it may very well be that Archimedes discovered much more than we know. Nearly all of his works were destroyed in the Library of Alexandria fire. Those that remained were commonly recycled into christian manuscripts.

All this aside, Edymnion, you have missed the entire point of my post:
Ancient people were much more sophisticated than many modern people would like to believe. It is therefore not unreasonable for a particular fantasy setting to house sophisticated mathematicians, astronomers, physicists, engineers, etc. And Calculus need not have "Earth-like" physics as a motivator. It could quite conceivably come to discovery with a geometric motivation.

One last thing, the ancients did have thermally-driven devices, that actually accomplished tasks. Some were driven by hot air, and others were driven by hot water. Such a device is an engine. Okay, so they lacked belts, but they did have toothed-gear transmissions. But belts and pulleys are not requirements for a device to be a steam engine. For more information, search for Heron of Alexandria's works: Pneumatica, Automata, Metrica, and Mechanica.

In fact, Mechanica and Automata are wonderful references for DMs designing fantasy temples.

Cheers,
StoneStokes

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Aricomus 05-15-07, 08:23 PM	I was just wondering... Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things. Thanks in advance
Lina_Inverse 05-15-07, 08:23 PM	Physics do not exist in D&D.
kentonblack 05-15-07, 08:30 PM	specifically, the DMG says that theyre ignored for "ease of play". like momentum allowing you to move square by square with a speed 100 monk....or potential energy vs density of materials and the fact that giants dont have iron bones. really, how does two tons stand on two feet?
CryoSilver 05-15-07, 08:32 PM	They exist if you want them to. Physics probably work a little differently, but math is as much there as you want it to be.
Deep Blue 9000 05-15-07, 08:38 PM	I was just wondering... Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things. Thanks in advance Are you asking if anyone in D&D understand advanced science or whether advanced science works at all in the D&D world?
Tempest Stormwind 05-15-07, 08:39 PM	I think he means if people, in the D&D world, study physics or math, and if so, to what level? This is completely campaign-dependent, and undoubtedly shaped by magic. For instance, looking at Sharn, House Cannith, and anything that comes out of Zilargo, I can tell that people in Eberron know a thing or two about architecture and engineering. However, Sharn's in a manifest zone that enhances flying magic, House Cannith is masterful at building magical devices, and the gnomes are proficient at binding elementals to do their bidding. Magic is another force in Eberron, and as a result some of the more esoteric developments of real-world physics just aren't necessary. Why bother developing airfoil dynamics and the internal combustion engine (or its equivalent) when soarwood and a bound elemental do the same job and you already know the basics behind the magic? Math is something else altogether. There's implications that advanced geometric theories exist in Greyhawk at least (the Geometer PrC), and the existence of orreries and star charts suggest a decent understanding of celestial mechanics (which we nowadays call "astrophysics"), plus every campaign world has a calendar and virtually every one has kingdoms with census data, tax systems, and similar. It's difficult to predict where magic and math intersect, or if magic is even bound by logical rules (it clearly violates the physical laws of thermodynamics!), but this is something you can flesh out in your games to boot. I know that my physics degree's provided me with no end of buzzwords to transmute into arcanobabble for my wizard. No, I have no idea what Relingoff's Reversal is as it pertains to static abjuration fields, nor could I derive it on the back of an envelope, but it sure sounds impressive, doesn't it?
Aricomus 05-15-07, 09:59 PM	Thanks for all your input. The main reason I asked the question was because I had a rough idea about a player who deals with combat in an incredibly analytical and mathmatical manner. I was also wondering what class would be best for this....:plotting:
Dog_As_A_Devil_Deified 05-15-07, 10:25 PM	From an historical perspective, both modern calculus and mechanics are attributed to Sir Isaac Newton, during the 17th century. Some of their roots come from earlier periods, especially in mechanics (though the modern roots of mechanics probably stem from Kepler and Galileo—starting in the mid- to late-16th century). So they approach the right period, though they are a little later than what I personally tend to think of as the "D&D period". Nothing prevents you from implementing them though.
Domriso 05-15-07, 10:37 PM	In my campaign I set it up that physics still work (at least in the storytelling aspect; still haven't quite figured out the mechanical aspect) but that magic works under a different set of rules. That way they can interact and create spastic results, on occasion. Now that I look at it, it really doesn't make much sense when I put it in writing, but that's still what I did.
Sarella Starshine 05-16-07, 07:47 AM	Thanks for all your input. The main reason I asked the question was because I had a rough idea about a player who deals with combat in an incredibly analytical and mathmatical manner. I was also wondering what class would be best for this....:plotting: Just about any class can work for that if you really think about it. There is no reason that a fighter-type would be less able to do so than a caster-type (in fact, could be argued that a fighter-type would prob be trained to do so). I can assume that math and such would be about the same as it is here. Not sure that it would go higher than algebra or not though. (Calculus was created to help with the math side of the physical laws that Newton was working on (some of the more thornier issues about the exact mathematical nature of gravity and the like could not be written up using just algebra).) Physics on the other hand.. that may look nothing like our physics just because they would have to account for magic as a normal effect, and magic tells our real world physics to shut up and sit down quite frequently. For the other sciences, chemisrty would easily become alchemy, astronomy be astrology, etc.
StormKnight 05-16-07, 11:23 AM	really, how does two tons stand on two feet? In a not terribly different way from how 7 tons stands on two feet. (About the weight that scientists estimate a T. Rex at).
StoneStokes 05-19-07, 02:13 AM	I can assume that math and such would be about the same as it is here. Not sure that it would go higher than algebra or not though. (Calculus was created to help with the math side of the physical laws that Newton was working on (some of the more thornier issues about the exact mathematical nature of gravity and the like could not be written up using just algebra).) ... I think that one might find mathematicians studying Calculus in some D&D campaign worlds. It should be noted that Calculus was nearly discovered by Archimedes ca. 250 BC. He had a notion of both Limits and Definite Integrals (though he named them differently than our modern terminology), key ideas in Calculus, and was motivated by geometry, not physics. Had he not been killed by Roman soldiers at the early age of 70 years, we may have had Calculus 2000 years earlier than we did. It should also be noted that Fermat had postulated and proven several theorems in Calculus (in particular on optimization, the classic 1st-semester problem) about half a century before Newton "created" Calculus, motivated by geometry not physics. Just a couple of historical "fun-facts."
Optimized_Commoner 05-19-07, 03:18 AM	In my world I assume that there is a set of scientific laws, however rather than "being told to sit down and shut up" by magic, are the method by which magic works. While these scientific laws produce a world that looks vaguely similar to our own, (gravity falls downwards, etc), they are actually entirely different. Mathematics would be similar yet have certain differences as well once you get past basic addition, subtraction, etc.
Dog_As_A_Devil_Deified 05-19-07, 08:37 AM	In my world I assume that there is a set of scientific laws, however rather than "being told to sit down and shut up" by magic, are the method by which magic works. While these scientific laws produce a world that looks vaguely similar to our own, (gravity falls downwards, etc), they are actually entirely different. Mathematics would be similar yet have certain differences as well once you get past basic addition, subtraction, etc. I agree. In my game world ∫ 1/(cabin) d(cabin) = Natural log (cabin) + C = houseboat
SeptimusMagistos 05-19-07, 01:05 PM	Due to presence of extra fundamental forces in DnD, physics would be more complex than what we're used to.
Cthulhu3125 05-19-07, 01:59 PM	I agree. In my game world ∫ 1/(cabin) d(cabin) = Natural log (cabin) + C = houseboat This post wins.
FloppyLlama 05-19-07, 02:42 PM	From an historical perspective, both modern calculus and mechanics are attributed to Sir Isaac Newton And should also be attributed to Gottfried Leibniz. In fact, IIRC, calculus students nowadays use Leibniz's notation.
Edymnion 05-19-07, 03:02 PM	I was just wondering... Did they have things likes calculus and advanced physics-type things in the dnd days?? I know there wouldn't be nuclear physics and that sort of stuff, but what about in-depth mechanics? or calculus? If so, would only a select few of geniuses would have access to these things. Thanks in advanceAs we know them today? No, didn't exist. I mean, the very idea of using a zero in decimals didn't reach Europe until 1200 AD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number) However, its D&D. Just have a character take ranks in Knowledge (Mathematics) and assign DCs to the calculations and roll the dice to see if your character can figure it out or not. It should be noted that Calculus was nearly discovered by Archimedes ca. 250 BC. He had a notion of both Limits and Definite Integrals (though he named them differently than our modern terminology), key ideas in Calculus, and was motivated by geometry, not physics. Had he not been killed by Roman soldiers at the early age of 70 years, we may have had Calculus 2000 years earlier than we did. It should also be noted that Fermat had postulated and proven several theorems in Calculus (in particular on optimization, the classic 1st-semester problem) about half a century before Newton "created" Calculus, motivated by geometry not physics. Just a couple of historical "fun-facts."Or that the steam engine was ALMOST invented 2000 years ago. They had everything they needed, including a working steam powered rotation device. If they had just put a pully and a belt drive on it, they would have had a steam engine. But they didn't. History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world. Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't.
ORC_Paradox 05-19-07, 03:24 PM	History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world. Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't. Like THAC0. :devil: /runs for his life
Tempest Stormwind 05-19-07, 03:27 PM	And should also be attributed to Gottfried Leibniz. In fact, IIRC, calculus students nowadays use Leibniz's notation. We tend to, correct, unless we're teaching calculus to people who don't intend to use it for higher mathematics, such as if we're teaching it in high school (the basics of differentiation and integration are remarkably applicable to many real-world scenarios, even if you don't go into the depths of higher mathematics). Additionally, a variant on Newton's notation is used by physicists, since we deal with entirely too many variables and this variant notation is extremely compact (an associate of mine recently finished his doctoral thesis. He used up every single uppercase and lowercase letter in both the Roman (English) and Greek alphabets for various variables and expressions, and still had more. He ended up using Hebrew, since he also needed subscripts to track his work. I say we need to use a variant because even Newton's basic derivative symbol, the prime tick ('), has a specific meaning in physics ("after" or "in another reference frame").). That said, for most of our work -- including nearly all physics up to that point, and EVEN some of the physics AT that point (i.e. any non-time derivative) -- we tend to use Lebniz' notation over Newton's.
StoneStokes 05-19-07, 06:06 PM	Or that the steam engine was ALMOST invented 2000 years ago. They had everything they needed, including a working steam powered rotation device. If they had just put a pully and a belt drive on it, they would have had a steam engine. But they didn't. History is full of "almosts" that would have totally changed the world. Close only counts in hand grenades and horse shoes, as it were. Being close isn't good enough, you either get it, or you don't. I should have been more precise. Archimedes almost had discovered a complete calculus. He DID discover key ideas in calculus. Ideas that are now accredited to Newton. Archimedes discovered infintesimals, infinite series, limits, and a variation of Riemann sums. But you suggest that we should discount all of this because he didn't have the modern, Cauchy-Weierstrauss, definition of limit? I'm not suggesting that Newton should not get due credit. But it is ridiculous to say, "Nope, not the entire Calculus, so it doesn't count." By that reasoning, Newton would get no credit for gravity, as his theory fails to account for relativistic effects. And neither would Einstein get credit because Relativity fails to hold up under sub-atomic scrutiny, and predicts a much slower (by one hundred orders of magnitude) expansion of the universe than what is observed. Moreover, it may very well be that Archimedes discovered much more than we know. Nearly all of his works were destroyed in the Library of Alexandria fire. Those that remained were commonly recycled into christian manuscripts. All this aside, Edymnion, you have missed the entire point of my post: Ancient people were much more sophisticated than many modern people would like to believe. It is therefore not unreasonable for a particular fantasy setting to house sophisticated mathematicians, astronomers, physicists, engineers, etc. And Calculus need not have "Earth-like" physics as a motivator. It could quite conceivably come to discovery with a geometric motivation. One last thing, the ancients did have thermally-driven devices, that actually accomplished tasks. Some were driven by hot air, and others were driven by hot water. Such a device is an engine. Okay, so they lacked belts, but they did have toothed-gear transmissions. But belts and pulleys are not requirements for a device to be a steam engine. For more information, search for Heron of Alexandria's works: Pneumatica, Automata, Metrica, and Mechanica. In fact, Mechanica and Automata are wonderful references for DMs designing fantasy temples. Cheers, StoneStokes