Theoretical Physics and the Quantum Mind - Page 3

# 31 02-05-2010 , 01:34 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

Stevo,

is it possible to 'build' nano units on a sub atomic level, that have the soon to be implemented 'swarm' processing (aka insects) to be sent first? They then 'breed' in the surrounding elements to 'build' a receival unit. They would have to be beamed first and FTL of course.

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 32 02-05-2010 , 01:36 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
You would have to have a 'receival' unit wouldnt you steve?? if thats what you meant? but you wouldnt be able to. Secondly how the hell would you get the accuracy to hit said planet?? As a Surveyor I would like to know this one!!! It would be a real bitch to be 'sent' and get the wrong address???

Originally Posted by

Yeah, that was my point... not to mention it would take 1,000 years to get there (at it's fastest).

As for hitting the target, I doubt there would be too much of a problem.... I mean, we hit the moon with a computer no more powerful than a calculator, and a faulty understanding of Gravity.... I know the distance is far greater... but i would think that by the time we had the technology to build the teleportation device... we would have a pretty advanced navigation system.

www.stevenegan-cgi.com

"Your weapons are no match for ours! People of Mars, surrender!"
"Um, this isn't Mars. This is Earth."
"Earth? Earth-with-nuclear-weapons Earth?"
"Yes."
[long pause] "Friend!!"

Quote

# 33 02-05-2010 , 01:37 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

It was a TQ on UV mapping mate, how long and tedious it is to do I thought there may be a shortcut so to speak?? So instead of mapping the usual way you could 'pull the skin' up to a grid and all of the edges and vertices would spread out on the grid keeping relative distance, I hope that hasnt confused?

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 34 02-05-2010 , 01:37 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
Stevo,

is it possible to 'build' nano units on a sub atomic level, that have the soon to be implemented 'swarm' processing (aka insects) to be sent first? They then 'breed' in the surrounding elements to 'build' a receival unit. They would have to be beamed first and FTL of course.

Originally Posted by

Of course this sort of method would be one way of doing it.... but if we have a way of "beaming" things FTL.... why would we bother?

Quote

# 35 02-05-2010 , 01:38 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

got me!!! I just got up and wasnt thinking, baha sorry

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 36 02-05-2010 , 01:40 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
It was a TQ on UV mapping mate, how long and tedious it is to do I thought there may be a shortcut so to speak?? So instead of mapping the usual way you could 'pull the skin' up to a grid and all of the edges and vertices would spread out on the grid keeping relative distance, I hope that hasnt confused?

cheers Ant

Originally Posted by

Ant,

We kinda already have tools like that in Maya... that's how I UV map my heads. You can put seems into your mesh, so that your mesh could be opened out flat without overlapping, then i just use the relax/smooth tool to evenly lay them out. Takes about 3 mins to do a head.

Quote

# 37 02-05-2010 , 01:41 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

sweeettttttttttt. I will give that a go next time I do a model, I HATE mapping.

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 38 02-05-2010 , 01:43 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
sweeettttttttttt. I will give that a go next time I do a model, I HATE mapping.

cheers Ant

Originally Posted by

Cool,

I think we completely took over the thread... lol

Quote

# 39 02-05-2010 , 01:48 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

I found this while having an ale at 0945 bahahaha

https://www.ipod.org.uk/reality/reality_entangled.asp

P.S ALMOST non alcoholic beer, Clausthaler, bloody good stuff.

bahahaha maybe everyone else is in bed mate, its morning here in sunny Perth

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 40 02-05-2010 , 01:57 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Interesting site... reading through the first page now.

Ale at 9:45? Not a drinker myself, but I'm sure it's good.
It's almost 3am here lol

Quote

# 41 02-05-2010 , 02:08 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

Its the fisherman/construction worker in me mate. Trying to give up, got Type 2 diabetes a few months ago so have to for my health. Its less then 0.5% ABV so its almost cool drink (soda).

Yeh not a bad page eh?? interesting that a lot of this stuff was debated so long ago!!!! Magical minds these blokes...

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 42 02-05-2010 , 02:38 AM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Ant,

Yeah, great page... I love "Bell's Inequality" that's some great stuff... I've just given it a try with a few things... works well.

Sorry about the diabetes man, That really sucks.

Quote

# 43 02-05-2010 , 03:02 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

Genetics mate, cant get away from it.

Yeh I havent put his theory to the test yet, will do when Im done with real life, mowing lawns, chainsaw of trees etc etc. I havent read the page fully yet but will this arvo (when you are sleeping and dreaming of electric sheep?). Got some really simplified stuff in there and worth the read.

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 44 02-05-2010 , 04:04 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

steve and g-man,

the reason I asked about the navigation side (Surveyor, sorry) is this

1 arc minute is approx 30mm over 100m, 1 arc second is 30mm/60" so 1 arc second is 0.5mm error over 100m. Now, if your observation (backsight) is equidistant to your foresight the error is the same. IF your BS is shorter than the FS then your error increases the longer the FS is. So in a BS of 100m and a FS of 300m the error will be 3 times the BS. So for navigation this processing would be a nightmare, even if you included multiple BS to reduce the error through triangulation. If your BS is longer than the FS then the error is reduced.

Second: we havent taken into account the time factor. As you both know the light we see in the observable universe is 'OLD' light, the ACTUAL positions of the celestial bodies have changed or no longer exist. Now this is where it gets interesting. If we take the light from a point and compute our vector, where will we end up?

The light from point A is not relative in position to point B. I believe they use the Doppler effect to gauge whether a body is moving towards us or away but dont know if it TELLS us the relation between the bodies, ie distance. So even if we used point A to compute the vector to point B, in reality point B doesnt exist or has moved in space to a different position. So even if we could do anything at all then that problem needs solving, doesnt it??

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote