PDA

View Full Version : Fast Forward Time



ECM_specialist
26th May 2009, 14:28
Hi, guys.

I would like to suggest a feature that I would like to see in DeusEx3 : Fast Forward Time.

The main idea is that during the stealth approach, you rather frequently have to be for long time in the same place, carefully observing the patrol routes, waiting for them to be in a proper position, waiting for them to turn away etc. Sometimes, as for me, is was so annoying, that I had strong desire to run to the guard and stab him with my trusty Dragon Tooth.

Now, imagine the following: you hit the button, and game time accelerates, say, 5x. You have much less of subjective time to wait. Then release the key and perform planned action. Much less annoying, much more fun.

What do you think?

Malah
26th May 2009, 14:31
I agree! They should also add bullet time, but call it "Sniper Mode" so you don't have to wait ages to get that perfect shot!! And while they're at it, they should also remove all NPC's and replace them with Hello Kitty dolls!

Ashpolt
26th May 2009, 14:53
^^ Don't joke, I'd be more than happy to wager that bullet time will be in there under some name or another. Because, as we know, the industry as a whole has grown up.

As for the OP's suggestion...that's exactly the kind of thing I don't want to see in a Deus Ex game. Not because it's a bad idea per se, but because it's pandering to the Gears of War crowd. If you play the stealth route, you should accept the fact that you're going to be skulking around in the shadows (or, rather in this case, behind cover) and it's not going to be all action, all the time - if you want that, go the "guns, lots of guns" route. On top of that, the time you spend waiting for that perfect moment is what creates the tension of being the stealthy player. Add the ability to speed up time and that tension is shattered.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
26th May 2009, 15:16
I don't like the idea myself. In reality, you would have to watch the guards' patrol routes carefully, there's no control of time as such. Watching carefully is part of the gameplay and adds to the suspense. Move too soon and you get caught out, move too slow and you missed your chance.

WhatsHisFace
26th May 2009, 16:46
Hi, guys.

I would like to suggest a feature that I would like to see in DeusEx3 : Fast Forward Time.

The main idea is that during the stealth approach, you rather frequently have to be for long time in the same place, carefully observing the patrol routes, waiting for them to be in a proper position, waiting for them to turn away etc. Sometimes, as for me, is was so annoying, that I had strong desire to run to the guard and stab him with my trusty Dragon Tooth.

Now, imagine the following: you hit the button, and game time accelerates, say, 5x. You have much less of subjective time to wait. Then release the key and perform planned action. Much less annoying, much more fun.

What do you think?

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o47/WhatsHisFace911/forklifts.jpg

GmanPro
26th May 2009, 17:54
Lol. Speeding up time so that you can play the slow play-style without playing the slow play-style.

Doesn't anyone else besides me think that playing slow games can be fun?

Blade_hunter
26th May 2009, 18:20
Because do you think this is a speed up the game suggestion ?
DX 3 would be faster than the previous games, it was said on the news, but it's a pretty different case here.
But I won't express anything about the idea, because after knowing the results about slow mo, I prefer to stay shut and wait for the "reverse suggestion" ....

GmanPro
26th May 2009, 18:32
The last thing this game needs is more action. Everything I've heard about DX3 so far suggests that the studio is catering to the action side of the game. The regenerating health feature most of all. The reasoning they used to defend their decision leads me to believe that there will be multiple such features throughout the game that are too subtle to mention in the development stage. Other things that will "speed up the gameplay" and prevent any "breaks in the action." Things to make the came more accessible (I've come to hate that term now), like automatically adding items to your inventory after a fight (Mass Effect) or reducing the text in conversations to an absolute minimum because some players don't want to read (also Mass Effect, but in other recent rpg's as well. Fable 2 didn't even have text responses).

WhatsHisFace
26th May 2009, 19:05
Lol. Speeding up time so that you can play the slow play-style without playing the slow play-style.

Doesn't anyone else besides me think that playing slow games can be fun?

As a big fan of Deus Ex, Thief, SplinterCell and STALKER... yes.

If I want a fast game, I'll get Serious Sam or Gears of War (which I also love). But if there's a fast Deus Ex, I'd be less interested in that, than I would be for an IP that was intended to be fast, like Doom or Quake.

Ashpolt
26th May 2009, 19:21
[...]or reducing the text in conversations to an absolute minimum because some players don't want to read (also Mass Effect[...]).

Woah, woah, woah, woah, woah. Lois, this is not my Batman glass.

But seriously, I can't agree with you there. Love the game or hate it, Mass Effect had as much length (if not necessarily depth) of conversations as any other RPG - have you even got to the bit on Ilos with the Prothean AI? That conversation went on for ages.

Blade_hunter
26th May 2009, 19:49
The thing is the suggestion wasn't about pure speed, it was about time control and faster controlled speed to avoid the undesired patrols ...
And personally I liked the speed of Deus Ex, but that's not the subject isn't it ?
As I said, I wait for the [XXXXXXXX] suggestion to express what I think about that ...

Deus Ex 3 is faster than before (previous games) and that doesn't mean I like that.

Blade_hunter
26th May 2009, 21:30
How about an option to fast forward to the ending credits? :p

Sorry ECM specialist, but in DX nobody forces you to choose a stealthy approach. It's your decision alone. If it's too boring and too long for you and you want to stab them with your Dragon's Tooth instead, just do it.

+1

Really I think the same as you, he should uses the physical force if it's more his own style.
This is really why Deus Ex is so great, because it allow players who like gunfights like farcry/action games and/or infiltration * la thief 2 that made the game so great and keep always a tactical simulation aspect with many aspects balanced by the RPG element

Sean D
26th May 2009, 21:56
F**king up the gameplay for some users to feel more comfortable, is lame.

Removing car damage from Need For Speed, so that the straight-to-the-wall drivers can finish the game;
Adding health regen so that people without the instinct of self-preservation can survive;
Adding ammo regen so that mindless shooters can do their mindless shooting;
Adding the ability to defuse bomb past its timer's zero count;
Refunding the player with game money when they're bankrupt;
Anything of this kind is totally lame and doesn't belong in elite games. Especially in Deus Ex.

GmanPro
26th May 2009, 23:18
But seriously, I can't agree with you there. Love the game or hate it, Mass Effect had as much length (if not necessarily depth) of conversations as any other RPG - have you even got to the bit on Ilos with the Prothean AI? That conversation went on for ages.

That's not what I meant. I'm talking about the actual responses that the player can choose from.

I remember reading an interview by someone at Obsidian talking about Storm of Zehir and one of the things he said about conversations really ticked me off. In order to make the game more accessible, they intentionally reduced the player dialogue choices down to basically black and white responses. They did this because they wanted to avoid situations where the player is forced to say things that they don't want to. In the end all they succeeded in doing is making the dialogue very very forgetful.

I mean, look at Mass Effect. I can't remember any of the player responses. None of them stand out, because they were not supposed to stand out. Awful design choice. Games like BG are full of memorable responses and the games were better for it.

What I don't want to see happen in DX3 is for the player responses to be streamlined into oblivion (pun intended)

"I don't like our boss AJ! He makes us work too hard too hard so we should overthrow him!"
-1- [AGREE]
-2- [DISAGREE]
-3- [CHANGE SUBJECT]



*Shudder*

rokstrombo
27th May 2009, 05:43
Yeah, I can think of a few more choices that should most definitely be offered during conversations:

-4- [OBNOXIOUSLY REPHRASE PREVIOUS STATEMENT AS QUESTION]
-5- [SUFFIX "PUN INTENDED" ONTO STATEMENT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE WAS AMBIGUITY OR NOT]
-6- [RANDOM QUOTE FROM BASH]
-7- ["A BOMB!"]

OuttaZyme
27th May 2009, 06:20
I agree! They should also add bullet time, but call it "Sniper Mode" so you don't have to wait ages to get that perfect shot!! And while they're at it, they should also remove all NPC's and replace them with Hello Kitty dolls!

And at the end of the game, you get to choose whether to merge with the Helios Kitty AI, plunging the world into a nauseating age of red-and-white, Badtz Maru-mischief and cuddly, preadolescent despair, or to restore the once-powerful, secretive alliance of the rich and powerful known as the Bush family Illuminati.

Either way, we're rather f***ed.

Blade_hunter
27th May 2009, 14:11
To be serious and I hope ECM_specialist wouldn't take for bad the comments we did, I consider time control in FPS as a cheating option, the slow motion too and even the fast forward time.
Many persons seems to think the same about that (perhaps ?)...

Normally A gamer that want play infiltration in Deus Ex needs to be patient.
That's the first main quality of that kind of gamer.
Sneaking and wait the right instant to make a shot it's an action that require patience.
Avoid undesired patrols requires patience.
Patience is a player's skill required for that kind of gameplay.

Deus Ex wanted to allow players that are good or bad on shooting games to play the same game, this is what I call genius isn't it ?
If you are good on shooting,then shoot and if you are bad on shooting don't shoot and sneak around !!

A gamer that is good on shooting doesn't need to be so patient, he just needs to rely on its reflexes and aiming skills
The stealth element for those players is used pretty much like it was used in FarCry, to take an advantageous point (covered positions, points difficult of access, etc) to shoot your foes and don't take much damage.

To conclude Deus Ex required skills whatever the playstyle we got. Patience and Reflexes.
You add time control even temporary, you kill instantly that thing.
A game normally requires a minimum amount of skill, that's for that reason, we got difficulty levels in games.
You are skilled play hard or nightmare modes, you aren't skilled play easy or tourist modes.
Slowmo kills Reflexes, Fast forward kills patience then that mean Time control is bad for the gameplay.

VicMackey
28th May 2009, 05:11
Hahaha, "LOL" times 9,000. This is such an asinine, stupid idea.

But hey, who gives a f**k? Include it, why not. This game is clearly not going to be "good", so Eidos Montreal's best hope now is to make it something so *****ty that you just have to play it. Incorporating this idea would go a long way towards reaching that goal.

Actually, this idea would accomplish the goal all by itself.

ilweran
28th May 2009, 12:08
And at the end of the game, you get to choose whether to merge with the Helios Kitty AI, plunging the world into a nauseating age of red-and-white, Badtz Maru-mischief and cuddly, preadolescent despair, or to restore the once-powerful, secretive alliance of the rich and powerful known as the Bush family Illuminati.

:D

Well, I for one would play it. Maybe a third ending could be nuking the whole planet, then we could have a Hello Kitty/Deus Ex/Terminator cross-over sequel.

I really should be doing some work.

binlargin
28th May 2009, 20:45
I don't like this idea because I don't like the idea of robotic NPCs with clearly defined patrol routes.

WhatsHisFace
29th May 2009, 01:59
I don't like this idea because I don't like the idea of robotic NPCs with clearly defined patrol routes.

In real life, security guards have clearly defined patrol routes.

K^2
29th May 2009, 11:33
I like the idea. I don't think I'll like what will happen with the idea when it becomes a gameplay gimmick, rather than a tool for the player.

Sabretooth1
29th May 2009, 17:42
Reminds me of Operation Flashpoint, which had a speed-up time control (wasn't exactly a feature, and most people didn't even know it was there), thought to be fair, it was to counter the epic scale of the game. Traversing miles of land on foot or waiting for an event to happen took ages in the game, so it was actually helpful to get to the action.

I wouldn't want to see it in Deus Ex though, it'd be completely unnecessary.

Ninjerk
29th May 2009, 18:04
I like the idea. I don't think I'll like what will happen with the idea when it becomes a gameplay gimmick, rather than a tool for the player.

I used to use sped up time on SSB:M all the time to train my reflexes (although it didn't do wonders for timing combos and such since the intervals changed). If there is a similar utility for a similar need in Deus Ex 3, I could see it working. Other than that I don't know.

It honestly sounds like it would be something easily abused to destroy tension. FF until the guard passes, and if he spots you, quick load. Sounds like fun...:(

K^2
30th May 2009, 00:16
But if nobody's forcing you to use that feature, it's not so bad. It doesn't give you any real edge, just a quick "run through" tool for the impatient.

My worry is that it will be modified in some way to become some gameplay feature. In that case, you'll actually need to use it to stealth successfully, and together with health regen, it will slaughter stealth all together.

PlasmaSnake101
30th May 2009, 00:18
The whole idea sounds really stupid. If you don't have the patience to play Deus Ex, go play a different game. No shame in that. I play Team Fortress 2 when I'm in the mood for mindless action, but If I have a lot of free time and feel like getting into a game, I boot up Deus Ex.

K^2
30th May 2009, 00:23
For the most part, I agree. But there have been a couple of places where I could seriously go and get a cup of coffee before the guard returns to the position where he can be safely taken out, and no input is required from me in that time span. A game where I have to find ways to entertain myself while playing it has some design flaw. Yes, I realize that the stealth is entirely up to me, but it is presented as a major option, and so the fast forward feature does make some sense.

ECM_specialist
3rd Jun 2009, 09:38
Well, I sense a difference of opinions here :rolleyes: . It looks my idea has some sense after all, but it should be worked out. Say, this feature to be completely disabled for "Realistic" difficulty setting or having an "achievement" for not using this feature through the game...
And of course pressing any button or moving mouse ends fast forward time.

serrath
3rd Jun 2009, 16:55
Hi, guys.

I would like to suggest a feature that I would like to see in DeusEx3 : Fast Forward Time.

The main idea is that during the stealth approach, you rather frequently have to be for long time in the same place, carefully observing the patrol routes, waiting for them to be in a proper position, waiting for them to turn away etc. Sometimes, as for me, is was so annoying, that I had strong desire to run to the guard and stab him with my trusty Dragon Tooth.

Now, imagine the following: you hit the button, and game time accelerates, say, 5x. You have much less of subjective time to wait. Then release the key and perform planned action. Much less annoying, much more fun.

What do you think?

I think they're gonna pull some similar kind of stunt in THI4F to cater to the run-&-gun audiences, or that they've at least already considered it.

WhatsHisFace
5th Jun 2009, 04:01
I think they're gonna pull some similar kind of stunt in THI4F to cater to the run-&-gun audiences, or that they've at least already considered it.

You will have ride-by-shootings from a covered-wagon. Taffer, please.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
5th Jun 2009, 08:30
The whole idea sounds really stupid. If you don't have the patience to play Deus Ex, go play a different game. No shame in that. I play Team Fortress 2 when I'm in the mood for mindless action, but If I have a lot of free time and feel like getting into a game, I boot up Deus Ex.

Damn right there.... :thumb:

K^2
5th Jun 2009, 08:38
I think they're gonna pull some similar kind of stunt in THI4F to cater to the run-&-gun audiences, or that they've at least already considered it.
That'd be dead wrong for Thief. Deus Ex is an action game. It's not your typical FPS action, but it is action nonetheless. Thief is an entirely different kind of game. Then again, it's not Thief anymore, it's Thiaf, so who knows what else is changing.

JCDentonMale
5th Jun 2009, 15:08
Is it fashion to try to kill the various little pleasures we had in past games for the only benefit to allow the bad players to succeed ?

For me, concerning Deus Ex :

- Going to the opposite side of a map just for a medkit isn't breaking the gameplay or anything. It was just great as I am the patient gamer type. Deus Ex was great for patient players. "Auto regen" is dumbing the game and insulting the patient and adult players. If even it was an optional augmentation... okay. But that's not an augmentation if I understood correctly.

- Being patient, if you are the patient kind, always make you feel good when it worths it, eg you just waited 3 minutes in the dark for this perfect shoot or for this perfect infiltration. Perfect is the reward for waiting such a long amount of time. As many already said, if you don't like to wait, then you are not really playing the right game, or change your game style to "fire anything moving".

- I really hope there isn't some kind of auto-aim. I prey.

- I also really hope that there will be numerous hidden places that the common player cannot reach as in the first Deus Ex 1. (For exemple do you remember the woman who lost her cat in Paris ? There is a good secret place here, not easy to find... )

- Long and clever conversations are part of Deus Ex game, if there's too much "yeah man c'mon go go go" or choices limited to "YES" or "NO" it will just kill the gameplay.

- I don't underdstand the choice of a prequel, because whatever you do, the story of Deus Ex 1 is going to happen... Well let's see...

K^2
5th Jun 2009, 15:29
- I don't underdstand the choice of a prequel, because whatever you do, the story of Deus Ex 1 is going to happen... Well let's see...
That's pretty much how the real life works. No matter what you do, time is simply a dimension. It exists from big bang and into infinity. Your choices only change the ending you get to watch, but they don't change the big picture.

DX3 needs to give you a few endings, each of which with only some relation to the way story starts in Deus Ex. In principle, the number of choices you can make is nearly infinite. Game can only show you some of them. The choice that needs to be made in order for the story to continue as intended is not necessarily presented to you, but is implied. From perspective of Philosophy, Invisible War has handled this situation well, and that's how it must be approached for the prequel.

Spyhopping
5th Jun 2009, 16:39
I'm hoping that the choices that you have to make in the end will be more easy to relate to (but no less epic) than the globally important decisions of DX1 and personally significant to Adam. Besides, the important bit is how something happens rather than what happens in the end. And what K^2 said ;)

JCDentonMale
5th Jun 2009, 20:46
That's pretty much how the real life works. No matter what you do, time is simply a dimension. It exists from big bang and into infinity. Your choices only change the ending you get to watch, but they don't change the big picture.


I don't totally agree with you. What you say is true if your actions doesn't involve worldwide consequences. But as a Deus Ex game, your choices should involve worldwide consequences. Worldwide consequences could lead to radically different paths. Or, I don't think that a common grunt that do not change the world is a good hero for a DX game, if that's the case.

FrankCSIS
5th Jun 2009, 22:39
It all depends on the writing, really. As Spy said, if written well, the endings and various paths, if there really are more than one, will mostly concern Adam, the how, and the why of his decisions.

It is also fairly safe to assume the various factions faced in a prequel, given the chosen timeline, will pre-date most anyone we've seen before. Time being rather linear, the destruction, or the empowerment, of a faction at the end of a story does not signify the end of existence itself. Events in DX 3, be they as important and consequential as may be, will most likely have little influence on the potential rise of an ambitious man who was too young to be influenced by the outcome of the time. Whether you leave the world in chaos or rid it of a terrible enemy will change little to Page's ideals and the general state of certain cities in the world.

Consider the end of WW2, which, in itself, was as epic as it gets, and yet didn't prevent the world from instantly getting into another conflict dynamic. Stalin's ambitions and the Soviet Union would've continued to prosper and expend, with or without his German allies.

The prequel is too far behind to limit the future of certain characters, and too close to bring any significant long-lasting change in the world.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 00:54
I don't totally agree with you. What you say is true if your actions doesn't involve worldwide consequences. But as a Deus Ex game, your choices should involve worldwide consequences. Worldwide consequences could lead to radically different paths. Or, I don't think that a common grunt that do not change the world is a good hero for a DX game, if that's the case.
Nothing has global consequences. The entire history already exists. Time is immutable. All your pasts and all your futures are already there. Now, I'm using plurals, because there is more than one timeline, but you don't change the history by jumping time lines. You just select the ending you get to see, just like you do in a game. Every alternative path still exists, and there is another you in that alternative history doing his thing.

JCDentonMale
6th Jun 2009, 02:45
Nothing has global consequences. The entire history already exists. Time is immutable. All your pasts and all your futures are already there. Now, I'm using plurals, because there is more than one timeline, but you don't change the history by jumping time lines. You just select the ending you get to see, just like you do in a game. Every alternative path still exists, and there is another you in that alternative history doing his thing.

I see what you mean and that's an interesting theory, but that would mean that an infinite numbers of parallel worlds would be created every seconds, which is just plain impossible, that would involve so much matter/antimatter creation, and the mass of the universe would tend to infinite, exponentially. I imagine the time dimension as a movie : we can take every defined time interval a snapshot of the universe, and if you put those snapshot one after one, you will get the movie of the universe. A movie only have one story and only one ending.

The truth is that we do have control over our future. There is only one single path, one single future, and we all share it in common. Future is not fixed and is modified each time we anticipate something. Our own influence on mankind common future is of course related to the power we can use. For example if you have sufficient power and that you use it to declare war simultaneously to russia and china (you fool ?:hmm:), that will certainly change mankind global destiny. If you are a peasant all your life, then it would be very unlikely that you change the mankind future. All is a matter of influence and scale. The more influence you have and the more you can influence future arround you. And if we loot at a galaxy scale, if mankind blow the Earth, it would not change anything about the future of our galaxy because the influence of the Earth is negligible at this scale.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 03:48
Right... And you studied the various aspects of time as a phenomenon where exactly?

I'm not telling you how the world works just because I feel like this would make a pretty story. Everything I stated is a direct consequence of General Relativity and Relativistic Quantum Field Theory. Both of these have been tested to within twelve orders of magnitude. Statistically, the odds of Sun not rising tomorrow by far exceed the odds of these models failing. This is as close to certainty as anything gets. And for that reason, I tell you that this is how the world works.

JCDentonMale
6th Jun 2009, 06:21
I don't think so. I don't think that General Relativity theory nor any other theory proved that the time dimension causes an infinity of parallel worlds and that every possible future exists, at best it's only a prediction which could be false. However, what Relativity Theory explains and that have been proved, it's that some celestial object can be so dense that they can curve the space-time and so the light, creating some kind of worm-hole if the object have a sufficient density. But I wait for you to show me your knowledge in this matter to convince me of your parallel world theory, because despite I may appear ignorant to you, I'm very interested by this topic and have a strong willing to learn, and of course if it appears that you are right, I will accept it. I'm not a self-appointed expert because my domain of expertise is computers, not physics, however I'm very interested and wish to learn more.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 07:19
General Relativity simply states that time is. That future, in whatever form it may be, is already set. The fact that there is more than one future, is an outcome of Quantum Physics. And I never said that every possibility exists. Merely that any possible choice consequence exists, which itself is a result of chaos and the fact that every possible outcome of every quantum event exists.

I have to deal with this all the time. When I have to compute the probability of a particle scattering from another particle, I have to account for the fact that each particle takes many different paths in space-time, and that the actual interaction can happen at any point along that path. When an observer is added, things become a lot more complicated, because measurable outcomes will depend on how the observer entangles self with the system. This is particularly apparent from Quantum Eraser experiments.

Spyhopping
6th Jun 2009, 09:02
I thought that I was quite open minded and for the most part not ignorant. But I'd struck such things (parallel universes, another me?) off as being more wacky and far fetched even than most religions without a thought, and without having an inkling about anything like that. Unsettling really.

JCDentonMale
6th Jun 2009, 09:38
General Relativity simply states that time is. That future, in whatever form it may be, is already set. The fact that there is more than one future, is an outcome of Quantum Physics. And I never said that every possibility exists. Merely that any possible choice consequence exists, which itself is a result of chaos and the fact that every possible outcome of every quantum event exists.

In the domain of quantuum physic, many theories are just unprovable theories without any predictions (for example Strings theory...). Somebody have yet to prove that there is another branche of the universe where he is doing something different. Believing that there are many futures is same thing as believing in gods, nobody can prove it but they still believe it. That's for now only science fiction. As long as such things can't be proven, I will not believe it, that's what science taught me, I'm not saying it's false but I will wait until it's complete before I start arguying about possible effects of quantuum physic. What you say may be true, maybe the future is already set. In that case, it involves that there is an end to the universe and that there is some kind of mirror universe where antimatter dominate the matter and where time is exactly reversed, which is an interesting theory who would explain lot of things, but can't be proven yet.

I however believe in wormholes, those microscopic tunnels who join two distant point of the universe and that some fool dream about using them to travel faster than light speed, but I don't believe we could stabilize it at a mascroscopic level for our personnal use, or not until several hundreds of years. As I don't think mankind will last very long in Earth history, I say that's unlikely to happen...



I have to deal with this all the time. When I have to compute the probability of a particle scattering from another particle, I have to account for the fact that each particle takes many different paths in space-time, and that the actual interaction can happen at any point along that path. When an observer is added, things become a lot more complicated, because measurable outcomes will depend on how the observer entangles self with the system. This is particularly apparent from Quantum Eraser experiments.

That discussion arrive at the point where my knowledge is inexistant so I can't discuss about your work :)

However I'd like your opinion about some things fascinating for me : Are we, intelligent living beeings, only some kind of chemical reactions ? I mean more precisely, what we can call "mind", "soul" or "intelligence", could this be explained by one or another theory ? Does our minds are only chemical or does they use physic for their function ?

I hope I will live enough time to learn more about our universe because I think it's fascinating and that we only know a small fraction of its mecanisms.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 09:44
They aren't really parallel universes. It's the same universe, just different state. They call them worlds, but I always thought it was a misnomer. The alternative history states are more like two different moments in time than they are like parallel dimensions*. You aren't bothered by the fact that there is another you five minutes ago, are you? It's basically the same thing, only both states happen to correspond to the same location in time.

Think of it as a kind of gamebook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebook). All the pages are already there, and you just make a choice in which order you read them.

There are a lot of other complexities as well, of course, but they have more to do with the fact that time-location and time-flow are two rather independent things that happen to (mostly) coincide for certain reasons. Things like why you can remember yesterday, but not tomorrow, despite the fact that laws of physics are perfectly reversible in time, arise from that.

* Parallel dimensions are entirely hypothetical. They can exist, but we don't have a way of checking if they actually do, and it's extremely unlikely that anything will ever cross from one to another. So you don't have to worry about Sliders showing up, or any of the other inter-dimensional stuff that Sci-Fi is so full of.

Irate_Iguana
6th Jun 2009, 11:44
In the domain of quantuum physic, many theories are just unprovable theories without any predictions (for example Strings theory...).

The entire basis for QM are the postulates. The basis of the subject matter hasn't been proven. There just haven't been experiments to show that the assumptions are wrong. Basing an entire higher order view on a shaky foundation isn't exactly the best course of action.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 15:22
In the domain of quantuum physic, many theories are just unprovable theories without any predictions (for example Strings theory...). Somebody have yet to prove that there is another branche of the universe where he is doing something different.
Woah. First of all, String Theory and Supersymmetry are completely different subjects. Both are baloney for the most part.

Quantum Mechanics makes plenty of predictions. See the computer you are using? It's CPU? Entire semiconductor physics is based on predictions of Quantum Mechanics. Heard of Lasers? They don't work classically either. Seen MRI machines at hospitals? These have Superconductors in them. That's also a purely Quantum phenomenon. And these are just every day things.

Quantum Teleportation, Quantum Encryption, Quantum Computing, and Quantum Erasing have been predicted by Quantum Theory first, and then experimentally verified. All of these things are based on the principle of superposition and concept of entanglement. If there is superposition and entanglement, there is Many-World. Period.

As long as such things can't be proven, I will not believe it, that's what science taught me
The entire world around you could be a product of your imagination. You don't have to believe in it. But certain things you have to accept as facts.

And if you think science ever proves anything, you don't know first thing about science. The purpose of science is to predict and modify the environment. It is impossible to construct a sound logical proof about anything in our reality. All we can do is construct self-consistent models that explain the world.

The entire basis for QM are the postulates.
Same goes for any field of modern physics. That's the only approach that works.

If your postulates are experimentally verifiable, then anything derived from these postulates via any sound argument is just as solid. That's how we found numerous phenomena in Quantum Mechanics, Gravity, and Condensed Matter Physics. Yes, some of the predictions are not verifiable, but they are either correct, or the entire model is faulty, and there have been no indication of the later from any experiment performed, and there have been many attempts to find experiments that shatter QM, GR, and Statistical Mechanics.

I however believe in wormholes, those microscopic tunnels who join two distant point of the universe and that some fool dream about using them to travel faster than light speed, but I don't believe we could stabilize it at a mascroscopic level for our personnal use, or not until several hundreds of years.
Where do you get that nonsense from?

Wormholes can exist. But there is no mechanism for creation or destruction of one. In order to create a wormhole, topology of space-time manifold must be altered. There is no model that predicts that topology can be altered, we have no observations of it being altered, and the only equation we have for working with space-time - the Einstein equation - assumes a fixed topology. So basically, as far as we can tell at this point, in order for a wormhole to exist, it must be there from the very beginning to the very end of time.

Irate_Iguana
6th Jun 2009, 16:17
Yes, some of the predictions are not verifi0able, but they are either correct, or the entire model is faulty, and there have been no indication of the later from any experiment performed, and there have been many attempts to find experiments that shatter QM, GR, and Statistical Mechanics.

That so far we haven't found a fault doesn't mean that the model isn't lacking in a certain department or entirely incorrect. The sheer numbers of experiments doesn't prove anything either. It still doesn't change the fact that the basis hasn't been proven.

K^2
6th Jun 2009, 17:53
That so far we haven't found a fault doesn't mean that the model isn't lacking in a certain department or entirely incorrect. The sheer numbers of experiments doesn't prove anything either. It still doesn't change the fact that the basis hasn't been proven.
With this requirement, absolutely nothing can be proven. Any form of knowledge acquisition you possess is essentially an experiment. If experimental evidence is not sufficient to confirm a model, then you are saying that nothing can be known.

Now, I agree that nothing can be known with an absolute certainty, but there comes a point where you have to accept some model for what's going on around you. If you touch a hot object, you get burned. You accept that as truth, despite the fact that you have rather limited ability to verify that. If you seriously consider going to every hot object and trying it, not satisfied with previous experience, you have issues.

Let me take this a bit further. If I told you that Sun rises and sets every day, you, or at least most reasonable people, would accept it as a fact. But the Sun only rose a few billion times so far. Experiments to verify Quantum Mechanics have been performed to within one part in a trillion. That's nearly two orders of magnitude better.

If you don't wish to believe that Sun will rise again tomorrow, I can understand it. I don't believe in that myself. But if I tell you that it will rise, the odds of me being wrong are rather small. And yet, when I'm talking about Quantum Mechanics, I can speak with even more certainty. In fact, even if I rope in General Relativity and its predictions on orbital mechanics and movement of the Sun and the Earth, I can still say that the experimental evidence for many worlds is stronger than that for tomorrow's Sunrise.

Is this sufficiently strong to be called a fact?

JCDentonMale
6th Jun 2009, 19:45
K^2 : Okay you win. I don't have the level to answer :)
Thank you for the interesting discussion.

Irate_Iguana
7th Jun 2009, 09:10
With this requirement, absolutely nothing can be proven. Any form of knowledge acquisition you possess is essentially an experiment. If experimental evidence is not sufficient to confirm a model, then you are saying that nothing can be known.

It was my understanding that the proof for many of the QM theories and postulates was still rather shaky. Especially since calculations past hydrogen become almost impossible to do. However I've only had three courses in the subject so I must admit that my knowledge on it is limited.

Sean D
7th Jun 2009, 12:25
A gang of Einsteins hijacked this thread. For great justice!

K^2
7th Jun 2009, 13:16
It was my understanding that the proof for many of the QM theories and postulates was still rather shaky. Especially since calculations past hydrogen become almost impossible to do. However I've only had three courses in the subject so I must admit that my knowledge on it is limited.
Look up Anomalous Magnetic Moment. For electron, it has been measured to more than ten digits of precision (12, last I heard) all of which are in perfect agreement with the prediction. And that is besides all phenomenological predictions that have been verified already. I have already mentioned Quantum Teleportation and Quantum Eraser already. When things that bizarre get verified experimentally, it leaves little room for coincidences.

Quantum Mechanics is by no means the final theory that explains it all. I'm not sure we'll ever get to that point. But as far as things that it does explain and predict, it is very solid.

WhatsHisFace
15th Jun 2009, 05:53
A gang of Einsteins hijacked this thread. For great justice!
You have no chance to survive make your time.

K^2
15th Jun 2009, 12:25
Fun game. Catchy music. Why are we quoting Zero Wing again?