generally, there are two reasons you do testing; 1) to determine if feasible; 2) to seek how much of a beating your product can empiracally take

academics focus too much on No. 1

Big oil companies fund misinformation and fearmongering campaigns about nuclear energy to preserve their chokehold on the energy industry, and retarded boomers lap it up

No. 2 is what proves you can reasonably meet a requirement and how much liability

nah, they don't actively fund misinformation campaigns. hell, BP is one of the major players that developed LNG tech

that's a function of marketing retards that don't know their ass from their elbow

Boat

not white enough

I've always beleived that it is far more feasible to build a container for nuclear waste that can survive catostrophic failure of a launch into space rather than bury the shit and hope to hell a container lasts for 10k years without problems.

One you can test the HELL out of until you are satisfied with the risk

the other cannot be tested

unless you have 10k years to stand around and wait

https://youtu.be/Ll82POMkb8g

I am selling CRAM for 20 gold coins a bucket

Would you like some CRAM

Has anyone seen any development of games that incorporate Simulation/Stimulation of real world design requirements?

Just fling nuclear waste into the sun

Problem solved

Kerbal Space Program has kind of this idea in that it tries to provide parameters that are as close to real world as possible so you can test your designs

Mission Passed

respect gained

problem is getting it into orbit

Let the private sector develop the spaceflight tech as they are already doing, then just contract them

that goes as a given

but what would REALLY speed development is following the Kerbal Space Program model

only at a much deeper level

using a game with an extremely realistic set of parameters that mimic real life as much as possible

then in game do everything from develop new materials, new configurations, new applications and test them

At that point you're just talking about a physics simulation program

that's part of it, yes; it's like having one library of programs that mimics reality as closely as possible in different areas and another set of libraries that builds and tests shit

one is for education

So just CAD and a physics simulation engine

more complicated than that

FAR more complicated

Once you go past a certain complexity and accuracy of simulation, there's no reason to make a 'game' out of it

but generally, wrapping engineering processes into an intergrated game enviornment with objectives

there is though for the same reason competiton generates new ideas

and that the OS envior is much more agile than the proprietary env

Once you hit a certain entry threshold where the game is too complex and simulation-oriented for a broad audience, you stop gaining anything by making it engaging for a broad audience

Because they won't play it

Engineers will continue to use the programs they already use, because those programs already do exactly what they need them to do

it would have to be an open framework and not a traditional game