A third sense type

[David Johnston]

Re: A third sense type

 

If the transmitter is separate from the receiver, then by definition it's a passive sense.

 

 

That's not quite right. If I open my eyes in the middle of the night, I can tell that it's night. If I turn the key and I don't hear anything, I know my battery is dead. If it doesn't look like a duck, and it doesn't quack like a duck, then it isn't a duck.

 

It's part of the reason I've always been a little confused why active senses cost the same as passive senses. I don't see what disadvantage a passive sense has to compare to the disadvantage of broadcasting your location does with an active sense. If two senses provide the same information, but one emits an active ping, why should they cost the same?

 

Because a passive radio sense, for example, only works if in fact there are ambient radio waves. If you see by passive radio but you are in an area where there are no radio emissions worth mention, then you are blind.

[ghost-angel]

Re: A third sense type

 

Or in the dark....

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: A third sense type

 

Because a passive radio sense' date=' for example, only works if in fact there are ambient radio waves. If you see by passive radio but you are in an area where there are no radio emissions worth mention, then you are blind.[/quote']

I don't understand. Are you talking about sight or radio sense? I've never heard of passive radar. A passive sonar sense lets you sense solid objects around you just like an active sonar. Other than the pings, what's the difference?

 

Hmmm... Starting thought process over...

 

Normal (passive) sight can see things if there is light. If there isn't light, you can see that there isn't light, but you can't see the things.

Active sight lets you see things even if there is no other source of light. Your eyes emit light - at least enough for you to see, even if it isn't enough to be useful to those around you. That is, it doesn't illuminate the area for others to see the things. But it does enit enough light for you to be seen.

 

OK, I think I've got it now.

[Armitage]

Re: A third sense type

 

I don't understand. Are you talking about sight or radio sense? I've never heard of passive radar.

 

A sensor that detects emitted or reflected radar waves without generating them itself. Passive Radar Wikipedia

A radar detector would qualify, detecting vehicles by their own navigational radar. Or detectors using someone else's radar as the signal source, like they used in World War II.

There are also systems that can detect aircraft using reflected ambient TV, FM radio and cellular phone signals.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: A third sense type

 

A sensor that detects emitted or reflected radar waves without generating them itself.

Yes. But as I understand it, the purpose is to detect radar emitters, not to detect physical objects like terrain features and non-radar-emitting vehicles. IOW, active and passive radar are used for two very different purposes. And they would be built as two different senses in HERO:

 

Radar: detect solid objects (season to taste), Active.

Passive Radar: detect radar emissions, Passive.

[prestidigitator]

Re: A third sense type

 

Yes. But as I understand it, the purpose is to detect radar emitters, not to detect physical objects like terrain features and non-radar-emitting vehicles. IOW, active and passive radar are used for two very different purposes. And they would be built as two different senses in HERO:

 

Radar: detect solid objects (season to taste), Active.

Passive Radar: detect radar emissions, Passive.

.

Or detectors using someone else's radar as the signal source' date=' like they used in World War II.[/quote']