Forum posts

The pond thing, I don't know about that.
Sure there is no air that stops it, but the water itself is a resistance. :/

But then, how will it end?
Or will it end at all?

Just a question, no offence really.
How many in this thread believes in god, or, is religious in any way?

Yeah, that's about what I ment!
Let's call it "The madcow theory"

No, use the hl.fgd

It cannot travel outwards forever, the bang that created the universe did so with a limited amount of energy, as it travels further and further away from its source it will loose more and more energy. Eventually it will stop. Ripples in a pon dont go on forever but fade over time, and bombs only have a limited blast area.

Your nothing between 2 points is logical but flawed, just because at this current time in our scientific knowledge we cannot find anything between these 2 particles doesnt mean its not there. We may just lack the equipment to measure it. Remember that not that long ago there was nothing smaller than an atom!!

Part 1 of what you said.
I've never seen it that way, how stupid of me. :/
If you see it as it has a limited amount of energy (wich it must have, right?) it can't expand forever.
That's clever, really.

But this is just a theory of my own wich, just popped up in my head while reading your post.
What if the medium or, whatever we should call it, outside the universe really is NOTHING.
Then maybe the universe can expand forever after all?

I've heard that if you take an object like a chair, and then just kick it away out into space, it will fly there forever.
Nothing stops it!
(Of course, that would be plain vacuum, nothing wich can create any resistance)
What if the same thing happens with our universe?
It could simply expand untill it finds any resistance, wich, is very unlikely.

Part 2:

You just explained what I couldn't explain, thanks.

Yeah, that is what he said pepper, I love that line, and I also hate it.

No human could just, sit back and think about how the universe looks and works.
I bet that if you could, your head would explode.

I say:

There is no way we can draw the universe, only in equations.

Yeah, it's really confusing, but I promise you, by reading the posts in this thread you will gain IQ.

This whole "how the universe is shaped thingy" is out of my knowledge.
And what's outside, well, some people say that the universe is moving in some timeless medium, but I havn't read about that at all!

My schoolproject will only include what's inside, and a theory about how it might have been created.
And that is how this "nothingness" somehow created matter.
I will read more about it and then I might be able to explain it better.

Are you sure that you've typed in the correct ways to the maps folder?

There was nothingness and then suddenly WHAM Shit loads of matter just popped out of nothing.

That is not imposseble.
It's just that you make it sound like a silly theory when you,, express yourself like that...
I forgot to comment about it in my last post.
Here we go again.
The "nothingness" that it poped out from indeed was nothing.
But not the same nothing as you speak of.
It was the same nothing shit that I talked about in the beginning.

Here's what I think:

The universe was born out of nothing.
Be cause there is something in nothing, but not something that would make us call nothing something (yes, confusing)
A force, wich created the first singularity, wich then exploded and matter was created.

I can't explain it any better for now.

Dar matter? hmm? Remember that stuff about anti gravity, that could be a good reason

Sorry I ment Dark energy.

---

By the way, I've messed up a bit here.
What I said about "The outer space" and about the "nothingness" out there.
That can't still be perfect vacuum.
The force is still there!
Though, how do we know?
We can't just, run to the end of our universe, and push out our head and look if there is anything out there.
Me and, VOX I think,, discussed this in an other thread, where we said that if you travell straight out in the universe, you will at the end find your self on the same spot as you started.
See the universe as a globe wich you walk on, walk straight out and you will go around the globe.

I'm a bit confused about this tough, because the new theory about how our universe looks, (wich is more "popular" or, well, our equations points out that this is closer to the truth..) says that our universe is shaped like a horse sadle.
And I don't know anything about that theory so I can't say anything more about it.

[ (not sure about this, but, anyways:)

But I think the theory is called, "an open universe"

This globething wich I talked about above, that theory is called "A closed universe"

]

like a collection of marbles in a very big bag.

Yeah I saw that movie too, it's called men in black.

No, bet seriously, I've missunderstood you totaly.

Now that you explain I can see what you mean and you are correct.
But in here, in our universe, there can't be nothing, else we wouldn't be here.

Sure, it seems as there should be an infinite of nothing outside our universe.
About what you said:

True. However which is more plausable;

1: The universe has always been, first there was a black hole which mass grew so great that its own energy caused itself to explode thus the big bang.

or

2: There was nothingness and then suddenly WHAM Shit loads of matter just popped out of nothing.

Seriously, think about it.

One of these is what I started to talk about in part 1.
And that is the first thing you said.
But I wasn't gonna really bring it up until somewhere in the end of the "book"
According to a theory, our universe is just a part of an infinite "ritual"
I've read this in a book, it went something like this:

"It all "started" as a singularity, and suddenly, something caused this singularity to explode! (Dar matter? hmm? Remember that stuff about anti gravity, that could be a good reason)
in the first second the universe was as big as an atom, and one second after that, it was as big as a,, well, very big anyways."

I like that theory, and that isn't the end of it, it continues like so:

"After living for a long time, the universe implodes into a singularity again, and the whole thing starts over"

I doubt about that part.
I mean, the universe is expanding, and accelerating!
So I don't believe in that part.

I don't know for sure what I do believe in, it all has its own leaks.

Sneaky bastards.

Maybe if you change the name of the mod? ??

Your wrong about the first part MadCow, nothing is nothing. Its not somthing, if it were it would not be called nothing it could be called somthing.

The universe wasn't born out of nothing, there was somthing there to begin with, you cant get somthing out of nothing. Nothiness is just that. A vacume is nothing, there is nothing there, nothing at all.

Read again.
According to theory
we MUST have been born out of what we call "nothing"
There is something in vacuum/space, but the scientists can't say what.
Severall experiments has been made in vacuum, where they have put an onject inside a vacuum chamber, and they have seen that "some kind" of an inviseble force is affecting this object.
I've seen in my self (on television. )

There really isn't a perfect nothing.
There is always something.

Though, I can't say, THIS IS THE TRUUTH, it is theory.
But I believe in it.
I can't say that you are wrong, and you can't say that I am wrong. ^^
It's silly, isn't it.

I won't pay for Gmod.
One thing, could you keep the current version without paying for it? :S

There is no perfect vacuum! smile - My psyics teacher told me that..

That's what I was trying to say in chapter 1.
There is no such thing as nothing.
I love to say that, XD

I don't know alot about dark matter, all I know is:

We don't know for sure what dark matter is.
It is invisseble because it seems to absorbe any kind of electromagnetic radiation.
We know that it is there though, because it has mass, and therefore we can use machines that can feel the gravityfield that the dark matter creates.

In all of the books I've read, there's no better explenation of dark matter than that. :S

I don't think it just is "fiction"
I believe that we have found dark matter be cause we have felt this gravity.

We think that a lot of stuff contains dark matter.
I've read that we found a star or something that had a much greater gravity then what the mass of it could do.
Therefor they said that "some kind of dark matter makes the star heavier than what it should be."

I think I'll look up some facts on it and include it in Part 4.

/me wants to download

Looks like pwnage

This chapter didn't turn out as good as the others, but at least it explains Einsteins theory about gravity.

Part 3 - Gravity.

When you read this, you might sit in your office, or, maybe home in your room.
More things happens in this room than you know.
For example, the computer screen tries to drag you against it, on the same time as you try to drag the screen against you.
And there's nothing you can do about it!
Everything in the room is draged against you, and so on..
The gravity is the villain behind this.
Everything has gravity.

MASS = GRAVITY

Everything that has mass, also has its own gravity field.
Your gravity field is very small because you don't have so much mass.
But a planet, or a star has LOADS of mass!

Einstein figgured out an easy way to explain gravity, and I will use it in this text too.
He said that you can take a large rubbercloth, and pretend that it is the spacetime.
When you put a heavy object on this cloth, it will bend the cloth / the spacetime.
It's infact much harder than this but the rubbercloth explenation is good enough if you want to understand how it works.

There's a lot of maths behind gravity.
One thing that could come usefull to know, is that when the space between a massive object, and a much smaller object increeses to the dubble, the force of the gravity will be 4 times weaker.

---

That is very cleverly put in my opinion Madcow.

Thanks!

Im not but ive a physics background and just love experiments to prove stuff, i love theories as i often come up with some myself (even if they are rather outlandish) just to spark a conversation. Thats the beauty of a theory, it can be anything you like, its when theories start being used as fact that it gets to me!

I also work under the fact that if you make a theory, you should try and prove it wrong not try and prove it right. If you cant then it must be true.

It used to make sense that the earth was flat until someone proved different! However, you seem to take the theories with a pinch of salt so this should make an interesting thread

I'm glad to see that you have similar interests as I have.
You shouldn't use a theory as if it was a fact, no, not in most cases.
But sometimes we all need a wall to lean against.
But else, I agree with you, totaly!

Part 3 will be about gravity, a simple explenation.

MNuTz:

No one knows.
And that's the beuty of it!
But scientists are working on it.

That chapter is like an intro, and I will get back to it when we start talking about how the universe was born.
Or well, a theory of how it was born.

*Space science is about 95% theory, we cant or havent proven the majority of our theories so we dont know if newer theories based on unproven theories are in fact reliable.

True, but it all makes sense.
Don't be negative mr.

Er... yeah. Is the description not simple enough?

No.

Some people may not "understand" the word "post-disaster..."

Yes.

Could you describe that with more detail?
I don't really understand.

I'm confused.
Have I gotten this right?

You take the base map, and, you remake the whole thing so it looks like something really bad has happened (post disaster) ?

Thanks.
But it ain't finnished yet,

Edit:

By the way, I'm not sure what part 3 should be about, even if there is so much to write about.
Any ideas?

This is a, quite big,, thing that I'm writing for the moment, it's a summary of what we know about the universe so far.

I'm going to type down part 1 and 2 here ( I've only written this far anyways)
because there are some facts wich I'm not quite sure are correct.
If you are interested maybe you could help me?

This whole thing is a voluntary school project by the way. Feel free to discuss any statement.
And I would also be glad if ou corrected my english on this one.

Part 1 - No such thing as nothing
If I show you a box filled with air and ask you, "what's in the box?"
You will probebly say "nothing".
Then I'll say, no, that's not correct, there is air in the box.

I then show you a box wich I've pumped out all the air, wich leaves only vacuum in the box.
And I ask you the same question again.
This time I'm sure that you will say nothing.
But once again I say "no, that's not correct".
There is no such thing as nothing.
And I've got a very good prove that my statement is true.
And the prove is, everything.
We are, for example, a thing that proves that my statement is true.
Everything; The universe, the galaxies, the solarsystems, have all been born out of what we call "nothing"
Wich means that there is something in nothing.
And there's nothing more to say about that, yet

Part 2 - Goodbye dear neighbors

Edwin Hubble did a great discovery at the end of 1920, when he aimed his telescope at the sky.
He discovered that the galaxies are moving away from eachother.
He saw that the light from the galaxies was redshifting.
Redshifting is a fenomeno in the "Doppler effect", wich occurs when light travells away from the spectator in a very high speed, wich makes the frequency lower and the apparent wavelength longer, wich gives the light a red color.

Some astronomers thought that the gravity from the other gallaxied would slow the other gallaxies down, and eventually make eachother fall into a center where they would collaps into a great singulatiry, but no.
Later they discovered that the gallaxies wheren't slowing down, infact, they where gaining speed!
A theory says that a mysterious dark energy, also called "antigravity" is inside the gallaxies and absorbes the gravity from the other galaxies and makes the galaxy accelerate away from the other galaxies.

---

What do you think?
Discuss and tell me your opinion, please.

Thanks!

Pink Floyd - Outside the wall

:')

I don't get it. :S

Edit: oh, I get it.

Fake ftw

Pink Floyd - Young lust

Sure, I could write you a tutorial.
It aint hard at all.

Woah, strider is one hot son of a spammer

You guys earning money for saying all these things?

I used firefox for a while.
I didn't notice ANY difference at all.
Oh, woaw, it blocked pop-ups.
Wow, it can open links in one of theese bookmark thingies that appares in the toolfield.
I don't like any of those functions.
Why?
Well, I don't brows around on many different websites.
Mostly, I'm on TWHL, or, newground perhaps,
or some other forum.
None of these has pop ups (exept new grounds, wich, btw firefox can't block)
I don't want them to make bookmarks out of 4 pages.
I want them down there at the bottom of the sceen.
Sure, firefox takes up less memory than IE. BUT
I have 1 gig wich is enough to open IE and run MSN.
I don't run IE at the same time that I run a game.
So, I have no use for that ether.

Therefore, I find firefox more annoying than IE.
And therefore I use IE.

We should use what we like or need.
I personnaly think that this thread is stupid.
No, please don't ask why I replie to the thread if I think it is stupid.

I'll say no more.

I'll stay with internet explorer.
How we use the internet is our own problem right?

I'm setting up a metrocop to aim.

I found an animation named "pistolangryidle2", and he aims straight ahead on that animation, so, If I don't find the standard aim animation, I could simply use that one.

Oh, just figgured that fac,, you got a job? Any ways, :P....
Well, face poser doesn't work I think, be cause it simply just move the head of the model.
BUT
Maybe you could run 2 scripts on the same time?
One that runs the animation, and one that aims the model?

I don't get that error.

(yay I was on teh screeny)

oh lala, I like.

That's it!
Thank you thank you thank you!

I simply do this:

I set up a NPC_metropolice, and an info_target named "target01".
I also make a scripted_sequence targeted to the npc_metropolice with some kind of an aim animation.
I then setup a scene in faceposer where you can specify where the NPC should look.
In that field, I type the info_target wich I named "target01"

You pwn habboi.
Thanks

Bah, it did something else.
But there must be something you can do, right?

I don't think that's posseble, but, maybe. :S

Edit:

I just went through the entity list and found "scripted_target"
maybe that entity can become handy?

Well, I wonder if I can make an NPC draw his weaponand then aim it at a specific target (wich in this case is an info_target called "target01")
Posseble?
In that case, how?

Thanks!

Maybe I'll start play CS again after all.

Edit:

/me asks ZombieLoffe

that's imposseble to do in hammer though.
I'll try to make a normal displacement and check the compile log and see what happens................................tomorrow

The problem is not that serious.
If the map starts lagging, THEN you might wanna fix it, else, nah.
(IF it is an error)

<Madcow> Fear my powers of observation

...

I think that the metropolice in the last frame is posed like a chicken.

You wanna touch it?

No seriously, I can post it, nothing odd with it, just a field of grass smoothly manipulated.

I like the smoke, looks more realistic than before.
Or is it just me?

DarkKilauea: Are you sure?
My map has this "error" in it, and I didn't have it until after I put in displacements in my map.
And the more I have the more Defenerate Triangle thingies I get.

I think it's just simply the compilers way to express the different movments of the displacements wich after all is, builded up by triangels.

The hunter: What about those who doesn't have steam? Hm?
Maybe that would incurrage them to get it.

The trailer is awsome, I'm looking forward to it's release

"Swedish music. Lovely."
Are you serious?

I've never heard that song though, so I shouldn't say anything.

Where's the trigger? :S
Or is it that odd button?

Or simply very bored.

I think it's a fake. :