thebackalleys
squishies and art
You are not logged in.
( Login | Register )

GUNS OF TEH AWESOME

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #80 on: November 28, 2008 03:58 PM »
Quote from: egoraptor
You know, I get fanart of awesome Snake, and I say to myself "I am not proud of this" and wish so bad that people would appreciate my own characters and not my 'awesome' stuff, but, you know, all in due time, hopefully.
don't count on it

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #81 on: November 28, 2008 04:02 PM »
Maybe if you posted some art other than the rudhed stuff you make I might regard you as an artist, but i'll admit I didn't read it despite my love for literature.

I'll read it after drinking some coffee and shit.

Offline egoraptor
  • *
  • 45 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://www.egoraptor.net
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #82 on: November 28, 2008 04:05 PM »
Quote from: Davebut
Maybe if you posted some art other than the rudhed stuff you make I might regard you as an artist, but i'll admit I didn't read it despite my love for literature.

I'll read it after drinking some coffee and shit.

All of my art is viewable on my site.

http://www.egoraptor.net/scrap/

There are a ton of sketches and stuff of original characters and STUFF but all the planning stuff with notes and diagrams I don't make public.

Offline ZekeySpaceyLizard
  • *
  • dinky doodle
  • 4,947 posts
  • 61
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • zekeyspaceylizard on Skype
    • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #83 on: November 28, 2008 04:06 PM »
The phenomenon called electromagnetic induction was first noticed and investigated by Michael Faraday, in 1831. Electromagnetic induction is the production of an electromotive force (emf) in a conductor as a result of a changing magnetic field about the conductor and is a very important concept. Faraday discovered that, whenever the magnetic field about an electromagnet was made to grow and collapse by closing and opening the electric circuit of which it was a part, an electric current could be detected in a separate conductor nearby. Faraday also investigated the possibility that a current could be produced by a magnetic field being placed near a coiled wire. Just placing the magnet near the wire could not produce a current. Faraday discovered that a current could be produced in this situation only if the magnet had some velocity. The magnet could be moved in either a positive or negative direction but had to be in motion to produce any current in the wire. The current in the coil is called an induced current, because the current is brought about (or “induced”) by a changing magnetic field (Cutnell and Johnson 705). The induced current is sustained by an emf. Since a source of emf is always needed to produce a current, the coil itself behaves as if it were a source of emf. The emf is known as an induced emf. Thus, a changing magnetic field induces an emf in the coil, and the emf leads to an induced current (705). He also found that moving a conductor near a stationary permanent magnet caused a current to flow in the wire as long as it was moving as in the magnet and coiled wire set-up. Faraday visualized a magnetic field as composed of many lines of induction, along which a small magnetic compass would point. The aggregate of the lines intersecting a given area is called the magnetic flux. Faraday attributed the electrical effects to a changing magnetic flux.
The necessity of motion to produce a current is due to the fact that electromagnetic induction involves a time-varying magnetic field. The same effects can be produced by moving the coil toward and away from a motionless magnetic source. In either case, the key to producing the current is certainly the motion of the magnet or the wire. The magnetic lines of the magnetic field must pass through a loop of the coiled wire. The value of the magnetic flux is proportional to the total number of lines passing through the loop (Serway and Faughn 653). The magnetic flux can be stated in an equation equal to the flux: f = ((A) or f = ((A) cos q. The value for the magnetic field ( is multiplied by the area of one loop of the wire coil (A) and the angle at which the magnetic field crosses the plane of the loop. This conclusion lead to the development of other law involving electromagnetic flux.
Sometime after Faraday’s experiments and conclusions, Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell proposed that the fundamental effect of changing magnetic flux was the production of an electric field, not only in a conductor, where it could drive an electric charge, but also in space even in the absence of electric charges. Maxwell formulated the mathematical expression relating the change in magnetic flux to the induced electromotive force (emf). This relationship, known as Faraday's law of induction, states that the magnitude of the emf induced in a circuit is proportional to the rate of change of the magnetic flux that cuts across the circuit. The induced emf along any moving or fixed mathematical path in a constant or changing magnetic field equals the rate at which magnetic flux sweeps across the path (Ohanian 784). The subsequent magnetic field produced in the coil will be in the opposite direction of the magnetic field of the bar magnet. This due to the relationships between the emf, the current, and the magnetic field. If the field were produced in the direction of the magnet’s magnetic field, the system would continue to build in charge due to the effects of an increase in the electromagnetic flux acting on the coil. The system would result in disaster if continued in that manner. The field must, by law, resist the increase of the magnetic flux acting on the coil in order to maintain the balance of the system. The equation for this is: E = - N (qf / qt) where N is the number of loops in the coiled wire and t is the time in which the flux, f, is changed.
This experiment will explore a few of the situations in which a current can be induced by a magnetic field. These have proven useful for the possibilities of producing a current with magnetism. The translation of this is that through construction of generators, the magnetic field passing through the coiled wire produces a useful source of electricity. The induced current and induced emf relate to the amperage and voltage passing through many of our homes today. These discoveries were used to revolutionize the way we lived at the turn of the century by providing the physical laws needed by inventors to produce new technology.
Procedure:
I. Currents Induced in Straight Wires:
1. Connect the single wire apparatus to the power supply as shown. The ammeter should be on high scale. Place one of the small silver compasses on the back ledge. Rotate the ledge and plot the magnetic field. Remember that the magnetic field always runs from north to south. Therefore always put the arrow on your field line in the direction that the north arrow points.
2. Turn the current up to around 5 amperes. Be careful not to touch any wires or you will get a very bad shock. Also hurry in taking your measurements or the circuit breaker will blow. Rotate the ledge again and plot the field. Read your textbook on the theory of magnetic fields for straight wires before doing this. Reverse the leads so the current flows in the opposite direction and repeat.
3. Now connect the wire loop apparatus, the ammeter, and the power supply in a series circuit. Turn the power supply up until the ammeter reads about 2 amperes. This time you will be using one of the larger gold compasses. Hold the compass on the inside of the loop, taking note of the way the needle points. Repeat outside of the loop on all sides. Draw the loop on your paper and plot the magnetic field. Reverse the direction of the current flow through the loop and repeat the measurements.
4. Set the panel voltage to 1.5 volts using the voltmeter. Connect a coil to the supply as shown below. Insert the slotted cardboard
in the hole. Using the compass on the cardboard, map out the magnetic field. Include the directional arrows. Reverse the direction of the current and repeat.
1.5 volts


II. Currents Induced By a Bar Magnet:

1. Connect a galvanometer (most sensitive scale) to the terminals of the coil, as shown below. Quickly insert one end of the bar magnet into the coil, wait, then, quickly remove the magnet. What are your observations? Use sketches of the coil to indicate current directions. There are four cases to be considered: (1) north inserted, (2) north withdrawn, (3) south inserted, and (4) south withdrawn. For each case there are four pictures. Therefore, a total of 16 diagrams are required. The direction the galvanometer needle moves is the same direction as the current is flowing. Remember the bar magnet has a field running from N to S. When this is inserted in the coil, a current is set up in order to produce a magnetic field that will cancel out the field of the bar magnet. Is the field produced by the current in the coil in the right direction to cancel the field of the bar magnet?
2. Repeat part 1, but much more slowly than before. Compare results. Does the speed have an effect on the strength of the magnetic field produced?
3. Repeat the procedure with the other end of the magnet.



III. Currents Induced by Current- Carrying Coils:
1. Connect a second coil t the 1.5v power supply oriented as shown. Quickly move coil A up to coil B, maintaining orientation shown above (note effects). Indicate the current in each coil. Quickly move coil A away from B. Indicate the directions of the currents in the coils. Remember current flows from to – and is set in coil A. Does coil A behave exactly like the bar magnet did?
2. Now disconnect one wire from coil A and move coil A up to coil B. Reconnect the wire to coil A (note effect), disconnect wire (note effect). Indicate direction of currents in coils for each case.
A B
V
Results:
The results of this laboratory are not represented as calculations. The diagrams in the previous section constitutes a large portion of the answers to the questions and assignments within the procedure. Most of the questions are represented in the previous section and those questions requiring a verbal answer are fulfilled in this section.
The first question from the second part of the Procedure section asks for observations of the swift insertion of the bar magnet into the coil. The galvanometer needle moves into position and then settles back to neutral after the magnet stops.
The next question, also in that section, asks if the field produced by the current in the coil was in the opposite direction of the magnetic field of the bar magnet? The field produced is bound by physical law to be in the opposite direction of the field of the bar magnet. The field acts to cancel the effect of the magnet’s field on the coil.
The next question asks if the speed of the inserted magnet has any effect on the strength of the magnetic field produced. The answer is yes; the field produced in the coil is weaker as the magnet is inserted and withdrawn at a slower pace.
The final question of the laboratory, from the third section of the procedure, asks if the coil attached to the power supply acts like the bar magnet did when moved close to another coil. The answer is yes; the powered coil has a magnetic field due to the current passing through it. When placed near the other coil at some rate of speed, the galvanometer attached to the second coil reacts to the current being produced in the coil.

Percentage Error Difference:
This laboratory does not involve any numerical calculations to be compared to theoretical values. Due to this fact, there is no percentage error difference found in the course of these experiments. That said, any error in the reporting of the results and data of this lab would be the result of human error. Any wrongful interpretations or misappropriation of the experimental situations would be attributed to the student. This is the only source of error in this laboratory.

Conclusion;
The laboratory results were very clear. The equipment was used in its proper manner and subsequently produced accurate results. The mapping of the magnetic fields around the current- carrying straight and looped wires were found to be consistent with the instruction provided in the textbook. The change in direction of the current produced to appropriate resulting magnetic field as compared to the text.
The bar magnet and coil section of the laboratory allowed for a close comparison with the theory behind electromagnetic induction. As the magnet was inserted into the coil, the galvanometer needle registered a current. The direction of the resulting field could then be produced with guidance from the theory and a little deductive reasoning.
The final section of the procedure also held to the predictions of theory. The idea that a powered coil would act like a bar magnet when moved into close proximity with a coil attached to a galvanometer also proved to be true. The galvanometer reacted in the same way as if the magnet were being inserted into the coil. The powered coil has a magnetic field of its own due to the current in the wire. As a result of this field, the galvanometer detects a current in the coil attached to it exactly like the situations involving a bar magnet.
The results of this laboratory indicates a successful representation of the basic theoretical guidelines. The equipment was satisfactory for the tasks described in the procedure and the results were equally as satisfying. With this success, the student sees the theory in a tangible form and this would help to cement the concepts of electromagnetic induction in their memory.

Offline egoraptor
  • *
  • 45 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://www.egoraptor.net
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #84 on: November 28, 2008 04:11 PM »
Well anyway I feel like this thread is kind of going crazy so I just want to thank you guys for being pretty cool about the things I said and I dunno if I did any good by it haha but yeah, it was cool that I wasn't met with total hatred except of course rtil hi there also that fucking monster datin' song is stuck in my head jesus christ.

Offline ZekeySpaceyLizard
  • *
  • dinky doodle
  • 4,947 posts
  • 61
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • zekeyspaceylizard on Skype
    • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #85 on: November 28, 2008 04:22 PM »

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

10 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
9 Members: Zekey, Belief, bug, rtil, MrScriblam, Sashura, Davebut, CoolDrMoney, egoraptor

Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #86 on: November 28, 2008 04:23 PM »
Quote from: egoraptor
except of course rtil hi there
hi
p.s. honesty is not a synonym of hatred

Offline egoraptor
  • *
  • 45 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://www.egoraptor.net
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #87 on: November 28, 2008 04:26 PM »
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: egoraptor
except of course rtil hi there
hi
p.s. honesty is not a synonym of hatred

Well then you must be a gypsy because the last time I heard people couldn't see into the future.

Offline CoolDrMoney
  • *
  • 3,146 posts
  • 48
  • Awards PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • Grayson Animation
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #88 on: November 28, 2008 04:26 PM »
I wasn't saying bee mean to em I was just saying you should at least positively use that power you got and redirect them to something better. Honestly if my Brawl Funnie shit got in the top 50, I would be completely ashamed and never make anything like that again at least not for awhile and Id be like "Dont watch this it sucks heres something BETTER you can all watch".

Anyway the point Im REALLY trying to make is if your woman lights a candle with her nose shes probably a monster lady gal.

http://cooldrmoney.deviantart.com/

"Hmmm...."
by: SpeedyPac
date: December 1, 2007
Wade is not gay, read his profile! It's sad that you would use sexual orientation as a joke, shows that you have no real sense of humor.

Offline ZekeySpaceyLizard
  • *
  • dinky doodle
  • 4,947 posts
  • 61
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • zekeyspaceylizard on Skype
    • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #89 on: November 28, 2008 04:27 PM »
Where Chaos begins, classical science ends. Ever since physicists have inquired into the laws of nature, the have not begun to explore irregular side of nature, the erratic and discontinuous side, that have always puzzled scientists. They did not attempt to understand disorder in the atmosphere, the turbulent sea, the oscillations of the heart and brain, and the fluctuations of wildlife populations. All of these things were taken for granted until in the 1970's some American and European scientists began to investigate the randomness of nature.
They were physicists, biologists, chemists and mathematicians but they were all seeking one thing: connections between different kinds of irregularity. "Physiologists found a surprising order in the chaos that develops in the human heart, the prime cause of a sudden, unexplained death. Ecologists explored the rise and fall of gypsy moth populations. Economists dug out old stock price data and tried a new kind of analysis. The insights that emerged led directly into the natural world- the shapes of clouds, the paths of lightning, the microscopic intertwining of blood vessels, the galactic clustering of stars." (Gleick, 1987)

The man most responsible for coming up with the Chaos theory was Mitchell Feigenbaum, who was one of a handful of scientists at Los Alamos, New Mexico when he first started thinking about Chaos. Feigenbaum was a little known scientist from New York, with only one published work to his name. He was working on nothing very important, like quasi periodicity, in which he and only he had 26 hour days instead of the usual 24. He gave that up because he could not bear to wake up to setting sun, which happened periodically. He spent most of time watching clouds from the hiking trails above the laboratory. To him could represented a side of nature that the mainstream of physics had passed by, a side that was fuzzy and detailed, and structured yet unpredictable. He thought about these things quietly, without producing any work.

After he started looking, chaos seemed to be everywhere. A flag snaps back and forth in the wind. A dripping faucet changes from a steady pattern to a random one. A rising column of smoke disappears into random swirls. "Chaos breaks across the lines that separate scientific disciplines. Because it is a science of the global nature of systems, it has brought together thinkers from fields that have been widely separated...Chaos poses problems that defy accepted ways of working in science. It makes strong claims about the universal behavior of complexity. The first Chaos theorists, the scientists who set the discipline in motion, shared certain sensibilities. They had an eye for pattern, especially pattern that appeared on different scales at the same time. They had a taste for randomness and complexity, for jagged edges and sudden leaps. Believers in chaos-- and they sometimes call themselves believers, or converts, or evangelists--speculate about determinism and free will, about evolution, about the nature of conscious intelligence. They feel theat they are turning back a trend in science towards reductionism, the analysis of systems in terms of their constituent parts: quarks, chromosomes, or neutrons. They believe that they are looking for the whole."(Gleick, 1987)

The Chaos Theory is also called Nonlinear Dynamics, or the Complexity theory. They all mean the same thing though- a scientific discipline which is based on the study of nonlinear systems. To understand the Complexity theory people must understand the two words, nonlinear and system, to appreciate the nature of the science. A system can best be defined as the understanding of the relationship between things which interact. For example, a pile of stones is a system which interacts based upon how they are piled. If they are piled out of balance, the interaction results in their movement until they find a condition under which they are in balance. A group of stones which do not touch one another are not a system, because there is no interaction. A system can be modeled. Which means another system which supposedly replicates the behavior ofthe original system can be created. Theoretically, one can take a second group of stones which are the same weight, shape, and density of the first group, pile them in the same way as the first group, and predict that they will fall into a new configuration that is the same as the first group. Or a mathematical representation can be made of the stones through application of Newton's law of gravity, to predict how future piles of the same type - and of different types of stones - will interact. Mathematical modeling is the key, but not the only modeling process used for systems.

The word nonlinear has to do with understanding mathematical models used to describe systems. Before the growth of interest in nonlinear systems, most models were analyzed as though they were linear systems meaning that when the mathematical formulas representing the behavior of the systems were put into a graph form, the results looked like a straight line. Newton used calculus as a mathematical method for showing change in systems within the context of straight lines. And statistics is a process of converting what is usually nonlinear data into a linear format for analysis.

Linear systems are the classic scientific system and have been used for hundreds of years, they are not complex, and they are easy to work with because they are very predictable. For example, you would consider a factory a linear system. If more inventory is added to the factory, or more employees are hired, it would stand to reason that more pieces produced by the factory by a significant amount. By changing what goes into a system we should be able to tell what comes out of it. But as any factory manager knows, factories don't actually work that way. If the amount of people, the inventory, or whatever other variable is changed in the factory you would get widely differing results on a day to day basis from what was predicted. That is because a factory is a complex nonlinear system, like most systems found in nature.

When most natural systems are modeled, their mathematical representations do not produce straight lines on graphs, and that the system outputs are extremely difficult to predict. Before the chaos theory was developed, most scientists studied nature and other random things using linear systems. Starting with the work of Sir Isaac Newton, physics has provided a process for modeling nature, and the mathematical equations associated with it have all been linear. When a study resulted in strange answers, when a prediction usually came true but not this one time, the failure was blamed on experimental error or noise.

Now, with the advent of the Chaos theory and research into complex systems theory, we know that the "noise" actually was important information about the experiment. When noise is added to the graph results, the results are no longer a straight line, and are not predictable. This noise is what was originally referred to as the chaos in the experiment. Since studying this noise, this chaos, was one of the first concerns of those studying complex systems theory, Glieck originally named the discipline Chaos Theory.

Another word that is vital to understanding the Complexity theory is complex. What makes us determine which system is more complex then another? There are many discussions of this question. In Exploring Complexity, Nobel Laureate Ilya Prigogine explains that the complexity of the system is defined by the complexity of the model necessary to effectively predict the behavior of the system. The more the model must look like the actual system to predict system results, the more complex the system is considered to be. The most complex system example is the weather, which, as demonstrated by Edward Lorenz, can only be effectively modeled with an exact duplicate of itself. One example of a simple system to model is to calculate the time it takes for a train to go from city A to city B if it travels at a given speed. To predict the time we need only to know the speed that the train is traveling (in mph) and the distance (in miles). The simple formula would be mph/m, which is a simple system.

But the pile of stones, which appears to be a simple system, is actually very complex. If we want to predict which stone will end up at which place in the pile then you would have to know very detailed information about the stones, including their weights, shapes, and starting location of each stone to make an accurate prediction. If there is a minor difference between the shape of one stone in the model and the shape of the original stone, the modeled results will be very different. The system is very complex, thus making prediction very difficult..

The generator of unpredictability in complex systems is what Lorenz calls "sensitivity to initial conditions" or "the butterfly effect." The concept means that with a complex, nonlinear system, a tiny difference in starting position can lead to greatly varied results. For example, in a difficult pool shot a tiny error in aim causes a slight change in the balls path. However, with each ball it collides with, the ball strays farther and farther from the intended path. Lorenz once said that "if a butterfly is flapping its wings in Argentina and we cannot take that action into account in our weather prediction, then we will fail to predict a thunderstorm over our home town two weeks from now because of this dynamic."(Lorenz, 1987)

The general rule for complex systems is that one cannot create a model that will accurately predict outcomes but one can create models that simulate the processes that the system will go through to create the models. This realization is impacting many activities in business and other industries. For instance, it raises considerable questions relating to the real value of creating organizational visions and mission statements as currently practices.

Like physics, the Chaos theory provides a foundation for the study of all other scientific disciplines. It is a variety of methods for incorporating nonlinear dynamics into the study of science. Attempts to change the discipline and make it a separate form of science have been strongly resisted. The work represents a reunification of the sciences for many in the scientific community.

One of Lorenz's best accomplishments supporting the Chaos Theory was the Lorenz Attractor. The Lorenz Attractor is based on three differential equations, three constants, and three initial conditions. The attractor represents the behavior of gas at any given time, and its condition at any given time depends upon its condition at a previous time. If the initial conditions are changed by even a tiny amount, checking the attractor at a later time will show numbers totally different. This is because small differences will reproduce themselves recursively until numbers are entirely unlike the original system with the original initial conditions. But, the plot of the attractor, or the overall behavior of the system will be the same.

A very small cause which escapes our notice determines a considerable effect that we cannot fail to see, and then we say that the effect is due to chance. If we knew exactly the laws of nature and the situation of the universe at the initial moment, we could predict exactly the situation of that same universe at a succeeding moment. But even if it were the case that the natural laws had any secret for us, we could still know the situation approximately. If that enabled us to predict the succeeding situation with the same approximation, that is all we require, and we should say that the phenomenon has been predicted, that it is governed by the laws. But it is not always so; it may happen that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in the final phenomena. A small error in the former will produce an enormous error in the latter. Prediction becomes impossible..." (Poincare, 1973)

The Complexity theory has developed from mathematics, biology, and chemistry, but mostly from physics and particularly thermodynamics, the study of turbulence leading to the understanding of self-organizing systems and system states (equilibrium, near equilibrium, the edge of chaos, and chaos). "The concept of entropy is actually the physicists application of the concept of evolution to physical systems. The greater the entropy of a system, the more highly evolved is the system."( Prigogine, 1974) The Complexity theory is also having a major impact on quantum physics and attempts to reconcile the chaos of quantum physics with the predictability of Newton's universe.

With complexity theory, the distinctions between the different disciplines of sciences are disappearing. For example, fractal research is now used for biological studies. But there is a question as to whether the current research and academic funding will support this move to interdisciplinary research.

Complexity is already affecting many aspects of our lives and has a great impacts on all sciences. It is answering previously unsolvable problems in cosmology and quantum mechanics. The understanding of heart arrhythmias and brain functioning has been revolutionized by complexity research. There have been a number of other things developed from complexity research, such a the SimLife, SimAnt, etc. which are a series of computer programs. Fractal mathematics are critical to improved information compression and encryption schemes needed for computer networking and telecommunications. Genetic algorithms are being applied to economic research and stock predictions. Engineering applications range from factory scheduling to product design, with pioneering work being done at places like DuPont and Deere & Co.

Another element of the nonlinear dynamics, Fractals, have appeared everywhere, most recently in graphic applications like the successful Fractal Design Painter series of products. Fractal image compression techniques are still being researched, but promise such amazing results as 600:1 graphic compression ratios. The movie special effects industry would have much less realistic clouds, rocks, and shadows without fractal graphic technology.

Though it is one of the youngest sciences, the Chaos Theory holds great promise in the fields of meteorology, physics, mathematics, and just about anything else you can think of.

Offline sQueef
  • *
  • 4,822 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://campnorth.tv/profile/squeef
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #90 on: November 28, 2008 04:32 PM »
happy thanksgivin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, wretched ephemeral race … why do you compel me to tell you what it would be most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is utterly beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. But the second best for you is—to die soon.

Offline egoraptor
  • *
  • 45 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://www.egoraptor.net
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #91 on: November 28, 2008 04:34 PM »
Quote from: CoolDrMoney
I wasn't saying bee mean to em I was just saying you should at least positively use that power you got and redirect them to something better. Honestly if my Brawl Funnie shit got in the top 50, I would be completely ashamed and never make anything like that again at least not for awhile and Id be like "Dont watch this it sucks heres something BETTER you can all watch".

Anyway the point Im REALLY trying to make is if your woman lights a candle with her nose shes probably a monster lady gal.

Yeah, I see what you're saying for sure. Well, I've been wanting to mention other animators' stuff more often anyway.

Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #92 on: November 28, 2008 04:36 PM »
Quote from: egoraptor
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: egoraptor
except of course rtil hi there
hi
p.s. honesty is not a synonym of hatred

Well then you must be a gypsy because the last time I heard people couldn't see into the future.
you know you're not the only person on earth who beat a dead horse (twice) then tried to compensate for it later

Offline ZekeySpaceyLizard
  • *
  • dinky doodle
  • 4,947 posts
  • 61
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • zekeyspaceylizard on Skype
    • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #93 on: November 28, 2008 04:36 PM »
Quote from: Squeef
happy thanksgivin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is always a mystery about how the universe began, whether

if and when it will end. Astronomers construct hypotheses called

cosmological models that try to find the answer. There are two

types of models: Big Bang and Steady State. However, through

many observational evidences, the Big Bang theory can best

explain the creation of the universe.

The Big Bang model postulates that about 15 to 20 billion

years ago, the universe violently exploded into being, in an

event called the Big Bang. Before the Big Bang, all of the

matter and radiation of our present universe were packed together

in the primeval fireball--an extremely hot dense state from which

the universe rapidly expanded.1 The Big Bang was the start of

time and space. The matter and radiation of that early stage

rapidly expanded and cooled. Several million years later, it

condensed into galaxies. The universe has continued to expand,

and the galaxies have continued moving away from each other ever

since. Today the universe is still expanding, as astronomers

have observed.

The Steady State model says that the universe does not

evolve or change in time. There was no beginning in the past,

nor will there be change in the future. This model assumes the

perfect cosmological principle. This principle says that the

universe is the same everywhere on the large scale, at all

times.2 It maintains the same average density of matter forever.

There are observational evidences found that can prove the

Big Bang model is more reasonable than the Steady State model.

First, the redshifts of distant galaxies. Redshift is a Doppler

effect which states that if a galaxy is moving away, the spectral

line of that galaxy observed will have a shift to the red end.

The faster the galaxy moves, the more shift it has. If the

galaxy is moving closer, the spectral line will show a blue

shift. If the galaxy is not moving, there is no shift at all.

However, as astronomers observed, the more distance a galaxy is

located from Earth, the more redshift it shows on the spectrum.

This means the further a galaxy is, the faster it moves.

Therefore, the universe is expanding, and the Big Bang model

seems more reasonable than the Steady State model.

The second observational evidence is the radiation produced

by the Big Bang. The Big Bang model predicts that the universe

should still be filled with a small remnant of radiation left

over from the original violent explosion of the primeval fireball

in the past. The primeval fireball would have sent strong

shortwave radiation in all directions into space. In time, that

radiation would spread out, cool, and fill the expanding universe

uniformly. By now it would strike Earth as microwave radiation.

In 1965 physicists Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson detected

microwave radiation coming equally from all directions in the

sky, day and night, all year.3 And so it appears that

astronomers have detected the fireball radiation that was

produced by the Big Bang. This casts serious doubt on the Steady

State model. The Steady State could not explain the existence of

this radiation, so the model cannot best explain the beginning of

the universe.

Since the Big Bang model is the better model, the existence

and the future of the universe can also be explained. Around 15

to 20 billion years ago, time began. The points that were to

become the universe exploded in the primeval fireball called the

Big Bang. The exact nature of this explosion may never be known.

However, recent theoretical breakthroughs, based on the

principles of quantum theory, have suggested that space, and the

matter within it, masks an infinitesimal realm of utter chaos,

where events happen randomly, in a state called quantum

weirdness.4

Before the universe began, this chaos was all there was. At

some time, a portion of this randomness happened to form a

bubble, with a temperature in excess of 10 to the power of 34

degrees Kelvin. Being that hot, naturally it expanded. For an

extremely brief and short period, billionths of billionths of a

second, it inflated. At the end of the period of inflation, the

universe may have a diameter of a few centimetres. The

temperature had cooled enough for particles of matter and

antimatter to form, and they instantly destroy each other,

producing fire and a thin haze of matter-apparently because

slightly more matter than antimatter was formed.5 The fireball,

and the smoke of its burning, was the universe at an age of

trillionth of a second.

The temperature of the expanding fireball dropped rapidly,

cooling to a few billion degrees in few minutes. Matter

continued to condense out of energy, first protons and neutrons,

then electrons, and finally neutrinos. After about an hour, the

temperature had dropped below a billion degrees, and protons and

neutrons combined and formed hydrogen, deuterium, helium. In a

billion years, this cloud of energy, atoms, and neutrinos had

cooled enough for galaxies to form. The expanding cloud cooled

still further until today, its temperature is a couple of degrees

above absolute zero.

In the future, the universe may end up in two possible

situations. From the initial Big Bang, the universe attained a

speed of expansion. If that speed is greater than the universe's

own escape velocity, then the universe will not stop its

expansion. Such a universe is said to be open. If the velocity

of expansion is slower than the escape velocity, the universe

will eventually reach the limit of its outward thrust, just like

a ball thrown in the air comes to the top of its arc, slows,

stops, and starts to fall. The crash of the long fall may be the

Big Bang to the beginning of another universe, as the fireball

formed at the end of the contraction leaps outward in another

great expansion.6 Such a universe is said to be closed, and

pulsating.

If the universe has achieved escape velocity, it will

continue to expand forever. The stars will redden and die, the

universe will be like a limitless empty haze, expanding

infinitely into the darkness. This space will become even

emptier, as the fundamental particles of matter age, and decay

through time. As the years stretch on into infinity, nothing

will remain. A few primitive atoms such as positrons and

electrons will be orbiting each other at distances of hundreds of

astronomical units.7 These particles will spiral slowly toward

each other until touching, and they will vanish in the last flash

of light. After all, the Big Bang model is only an assumption.

No one knows for sure that exactly how the universe began and how

it will end. However, the Big Bang model is the most logical and

reasonable theory to explain the universe in modern science.

ENDNOTES

1. Dinah L. Mache, Astronomy, New York: John Wiley & Sons,

Inc., 1987. p. 128.

2. Ibid., p. 130.

3. Joseph Silk, The Big Bang, New York: W.H. Freeman and

Company, 1989. p. 60.

4. Terry Holt, The Universe Next Door, New York: Charles

Scribner's Sons, 1985. p. 326.

5. Ibid., p. 327.

6. Charles J. Caes, Cosmology, The Search For The Order Of

The Universe, USA: Tab Books Inc., 1986. p. 72.

7. John Gribbin, In Search Of The Big Bang, New York: Bantam

Offline egoraptor
  • *
  • 45 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://www.egoraptor.net
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #94 on: November 28, 2008 05:03 PM »
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: egoraptor
Quote from: rtil
Quote from: egoraptor
except of course rtil hi there
hi
p.s. honesty is not a synonym of hatred

Well then you must be a gypsy because the last time I heard people couldn't see into the future.
you know you're not the only person on earth who beat a dead horse (twice) then tried to compensate for it later

okay great

Offline rtil
  • *
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • 25,159 posts
  • 653
  • Awards IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc! PIZZABABY SUPPORTER: this member donated to zhi's pizzababy! OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • rtil_yep on Skype
    • http://www.thebackalleys.com
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #95 on: November 28, 2008 05:04 PM »
cool thanks

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #96 on: November 28, 2008 05:15 PM »
I cant read that I'm sorry.  I can and have taken bites out of it though.

Heres the thing that I want to make clear before I tread on into murky waters: Illwillpress is the ultimate model of concentrated evil an artist can reach.

Unreceptive to any criticism, lazy in his art, unthoughtful in his dialougue, willing to shit out the same thing for his entire career, not to mention unwilling to stand by his work.

Now may I ask, why is it so hard to have written what you just did?  Why can't you slap some of that logic onto NG.  It would turn some heads and definately keep people from forming thought-bases like I have.  I still don't like much of your work, but you should realize most of my posts here are subversive and facetious.  There isn't a culture on hating you, but such a thing is growing because of how you don't address issues like these, you let others defend you and create rifts between groups of people.

I always enjoy seeing different points of view, and maybe if Alvin-earthworm wasn't so gay (couldn't think of anything to say) he might not be so hated.  Hearing from the author is always great, and hearing from someone without their head entirely inside their ass is quite nice.

Artistic laziness is really something I think you've stumbled upon.  Maybe thats changed in whatever you made recetly, but for reasons that I'll explain a little later, I've stopped watching Awesome movies, and I never will resume.  Its very fundamental Frame-by-Frame, with no attempt at shading or detail except at intervals.  This entire style, although befitting of the movie type, makes me vomit, especially seeing adopted and then made sacred by artists like Oney.  Its easier to produce than the most fundamental sprite fight really.

Thoughtless dialougue is a check.  Illwillpress has a habit of just taking his extremists thoughts and then spouting them onto a flash.  It may sound insightful, but its all just commonsense mingled with paranoid-jingoism.

The dialougue I've heard in the awesome films have been whimsical cursing intermingled with plot, and part of what flashes warning lights to me is PSP SQUIRRELS WAS THE EXACT SAME THING!  No pacing, rapid-fire intentional stupidity.  Cutesy dialougue and plenty of swear words.  You can see how I've come to expect nothing but more of the same in years to come.

Here is the big kicker to why I write this kind of shit.  I loved the first "Metal Gear Awesome".  It was a new and exciting.  It intentionally disobeyed all pacing and art styles to fit the silly theme.  I believed it was the start of a new animators career, a start to a career of wonders.    Instead it was the start of a repetitive series.  It was the start of a newfound cynacism for me in my faith of people.

If you think you can't change anyone's opinions on the awesome series, then you are obviously correct, but if you think you can't change people's minds about YOU, then you are provably wrong.  If I were you, I would work as hard as possible to distance yourself from some unreceptive dick like AlvinEarthworm or Illwillpress.  I would answer people's criticisms, dispel rumors, and work on finishing those original projects no matter how torturous they are.

In other news faggot is one of my favorite words to type, among nigger, dick, and jew.

Offline mishkamash
  • *
  • 4,154 posts
  • 0
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09
    • http://mishkamash.sheezyart.com/
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #97 on: November 28, 2008 05:16 PM »
fucking
<lenko> i saw a hedgehog on the way home if i was drunk i would have yelled IM DOCTOR RRRRROBOTNIK and chased it 

Offline psi43
Male
  • *
  • purple poop
  • 9,075 posts
  • 52
  • Awards OLD SCHOOL: registered before '09 IRCOP: this user is a moderator on the irc!
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
« Reply #98 on: November 28, 2008 05:25 PM »
Quote from: Davebut
If you think you can't change anyone's opinions on the awesome series, then you are obviously correct, but if you think you can't change people's minds about YOU, then you are provably wrong.  If I were you, I would work as hard as possible to distance yourself from some unreceptive dick like AlvinEarthworm or Illwillpress.  I would answer people's criticisms, dispel rumors, and work on finishing those original projects no matter how torturous they are.

I pretty much agree with that, I mean you can still keep on making "awesome" movies if you want to, I mean it's fun to you and you like entertaining people with that, but people are comparing you to dicks like alvinearthwork and illwill as davebut said, which is not who you are. You are different than these animators and you should let people know that, just like you let us know.

Offline Daveb0t
  • *
  • 3,774 posts
  • This user is permanently banned
« Reply #99 on: November 28, 2008 05:29 PM »
Well one thing that I will acknowlege is everyone has their pet projects.  their set themes that they always revert to.  their favorite character they like to draw the most.  But living off of that and becoming to attached is unhealthy by all means.