Page 2065 of 2066

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2022 12:19 pm
by TeamHavocRacing
Where would they go? They're behind the galaxy cluster. Would you have them in place or create a new field and populate it?

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:20 am
by jlv
TeamHavocRacing wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 12:19 pm Where would they go? They're behind the galaxy cluster. Would you have them in place or create a new field and populate it?
You'd transform it in a manner similar to the "c" to "b" transformation in the spherical to planar transform example that I posted. The only difference is it's not a spherical lens. It's an inconveniently lumpy gravitational lens so they'd have to estimate the shape of the lensing and inverse it. The resulting image would have the foreground galaxies distorted and the background galaxies true.

Even though it's behind the cluster the lensing is strong enough that the light rays are bending completely around it. Notice how it's mirrored along the bottom left to top right diagonal. So there's nothing hidden behind. The mirrored doubles would probably make it easier to estimate the shape of the lensing.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2022 1:15 pm
by TeamHavocRacing
When you kinda squint your eyes you can see how far the sphere of gravitational influence reaches! It's almost the entire field. I love getting lost in these deep field images. The Carina nebula one is 180 Megabytes!

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2022 2:05 pm
by Robert196


Apparently I made a video describing how my MXS life went, before it happened. :lol: Gotta love www.fraps.com

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2022 2:30 pm
by Robert196
Oh yeah, I broke my neck. lol. Mountain biking. Not really my neck, but my skull. Ordered a full-face the day before this. Weirdly, it was a Leatt helmet.

ImageImageImage

Pretty whack. Least painful thing i've broke, but get a neck brace. Wear a Leatt. Why did those go "out of fashion" again? btw, yes I am fine, doing all good, don't worry. Have noticed more people talk to me now, its weird. I assume they just want to know what happened to me.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2022 5:47 pm
by TeamHavocRacing
Gnarly man! Was that a scorpion scenario or do you recall lol? Poetry! It looks like a near basilar skull fracture.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 4:59 pm
by Pumaxcs
https://racerxonline.com/2022/08/02/fel ... ampionship

I think I would've preferred that purse money just be siphoned into the individual series as an extra purse per round and then it just counts as an extra combined championship. With the qualifying structure its definitely just feeding the top still, and I don't think they are all that hungry. I guess extra racing is cool, this probably affects MXoN pretty heavily, and any reason to go back to the Colosseum is at least worth trying I guess.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:26 am
by Racers52
jlv wrote: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:20 am
TeamHavocRacing wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 12:19 pm Where would they go? They're behind the galaxy cluster. Would you have them in place or create a new field and populate it?
You'd transform it in a manner similar to the "c" to "b" transformation in the spherical to planar transform example that I posted. The only difference is it's not a spherical lens. It's an inconveniently lumpy gravitational lens so they'd have to estimate the shape of the lensing and inverse it. The resulting image would have the foreground galaxies distorted and the background galaxies true.

Even though it's behind the cluster the lensing is strong enough that the light rays are bending completely around it. Notice how it's mirrored along the bottom left to top right diagonal. So there's nothing hidden behind. The mirrored doubles would probably make it easier to estimate the shape of the lensing.
My understanding is that without the lensing, the light wouldn't have been observable in the first place, thus why they didn't remove it. What is more interesting though is the spectra data they've released with the images.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:45 am
by jlv
Racers52 wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:26 am My understanding is that without the lensing, the light wouldn't have been observable in the first place, thus why they didn't remove it. What is more interesting though is the spectra data they've released with the images.
You'd remove the distortion but go with a much more narrow FOV. You would be seeing something behind the galactic cluster causing the lensing so you'd most likely have to erase the cluster so it wouldn't block the image you were recovering. It'd definitely be possible to improve that image.

I'm sure the spectral stuff is interesting to the nerds but it's just going to confirm stuff we already know. The galaxies are probably missing heavy elements that need supernovae to form. Not saying it shouldn't be done but it's not exciting and fun. NASA needs more showmanship. If they just focus on science they'll lose funding and science will suffer for that. It's their job to put on a show and let the science go along for the ride.

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:34 pm
by TeamHavocRacing
I think Webb is plenty good for a needed shot in the arm. Almost twenty years of delays has made it a REAL long game for me. Seeing the last minute hiccups felt like it didn't bode well. Fortunately, with each step unfurling it and calibrating it going well, it was incredible suspense for these new images to finally arrive! Woo hoo!

Image

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 4:06 am
by TeamHavocRacing

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2022 8:57 pm
by TeamHavocRacing

stupid

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 1:37 am
by jlv
This is pretty amazing. It's so accurately done that you don't even realize you aren't looking at the original sprites at first.


Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:27 pm
by TeamHavocRacing
Can they run voxel Doom on a pregnancy test screen?

Re: MXS Twitter

Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2022 12:24 am
by jlv
TeamHavocRacing wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:27 pm Can they run voxel Doom on a pregnancy test screen?
Not likely. Each voxel is going to be at least two triangles so those models are going to be pretty bloated and slow.