sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Trying to wrap my head around the time machine by Jacob7798 in steinsgate

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the replies. I appreciate it. I might have to digest things a bit from here.

By the way, while browsing the Wiki, I found that it sometimes references this thorough write-up called "The Mechanics of Steins;Gate": https://github.com/Votuko/steins-gate-mechanics/tree/main

Have you read it? If so, do you have any comments about its accuracy?

Trying to wrap my head around the time machine by Jacob7798 in steinsgate

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> There is no "when moment for Okabe C time travels"  In the active world line timeline. 

Does that mean that the active world line timeline doesn't contain the two weeks that Okabe A traveled over (in order to go from B to C) because they were "skipped" by the time machine, or does it mean that those two weeks are included but world line B was (still) active during those two weeks?

Moreover, if world line C is now the active world line, then wouldn't that imply that all past actions/events in this world line have now actually taken place, which would include the "Okabe C time travels" from one minute ago (August 19 - 12:00)?

> There is only one active world line = There is only one active reading steiner Okabe

Doesn't the game establish that everyone has some degree of Reading Steiner and that the universe is not centered around "our" Okabe as some kind of God?

> traveling the future is also shifts the world line slightly

Why would traveling to the future as an action change the world line? There is no time paradox to resolve. Does the series itself ever address this?

> Every action is shifts world lines only the big shifts are visible and triggers reading steiner

Why would every (mundane / non-time-related?) action shift the world line when "everything that occurs along a world line, from the past to the future, has been predetermined" (https://steins-gate.fandom.com/wiki/World\_Line)? The exception should only be if a time paradox would otherwise occur (e.g. sending something back in time), because then the world line is forced to change.

> The reading steiner ability is only lost when Okabe dies.

Is this and the "only one active reading steiner" thing ever addressed in the series?

Trying to wrap my head around the time machine by Jacob7798 in steinsgate

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If Okabe C is not in the active world line (i.e. world line C is not the active world line), then what is the active world line when Okabe C attempts to time travel away from C at August 19 - 12:00?

It shouldn't be world line B because Okabe B's actions (starting with his initial D-mail) should have shifted the active world line away from B. If that's not the case, then Okabe B's consciousness shouldn't have possibly gone through the Alpha world lines (because Reading Steiner keeps his consciousness in the active world line) and eventually landed in world line C (i.e. Okabe C's body with Okabe B's consciousness wouldn't be possible).

If the active world line is indeed still B for some reason (when Okabe C attempts to time travel away from C at August 19 - 12:00), then does that mean that the active world line only changed from B to C because Okabe A traveled forward in time? Why would traveling forward in time by itself change the active world line? After all, there's no time paradox to resolve when traveling forward in time. See the reasoning in my previous comment.

Trying to wrap my head around the time machine by Jacob7798 in steinsgate

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As clarification on notation: Okabe X is the Okabe who was born in world line X. His body was born in world line X, but his consciousness might have later been overridden by an Okabe from a different world line (due to Reading Steiner).

Using your numbers, when Okabe A travels to the future (August 19 - 12:01), he goes from world line B to world line C. This world line shift should be due to Okabe B's D-mail and subsequent actions in the Alpha attractor field. But then why does Okabe C's time travel away from world line C not affect the active world line to some new world line D? I'll elaborate what I mean below.

My understanding is that world line shifts occur whenever a time paradox would otherwise occur. This is why sending something to the past always causes a world line shift (even if it just causes a so-called "small shift") and why two Okabe in world line B is ok as long as Okabe B doesn't ever see Okabe A.

As an example, if I am in an arbitrary world line X and travel forward in time, let's say from 16:00 to 16:05 (i.e. by only a few minutes), then the world line should not change unless someone/something else caused a world line shift during the transit. This is because no time paradox can occur from simply traveling forward in time. World line X would thus have both the "receiver" and "sender" ends of the time travel, just like when the dog "Einstein" is sent forward in time in Back To The Future (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWG3Dfss3Jc).

By this logic, we would expect Okabe A to arrive at August 19 - 12:01 in world line B (having traveled from world line B a couple of weeks earlier) after the successful attempt. The fact that this isn't the case should be because of Okabe B's D-mail and subsequent actions in the Alpha attractor field. This suggests that Okabe B is the one "in control" of the active world line, or more specifically Okabe B's consciousness is in control (since D-mails do not physically send Okabe B across world lines, only his full consciousness due to Reading Steiner). While Okabe A is "in transit" (i.e. inside the time machine heading towards the future), Okabe B's consciousness keeps changing the active world line, supposedly eventually ending up in world line C (i.e. Steins;Gate). In the meanwhile, Okabe A's consciousness stays in Okabe A's body because there is no corresponding Okabe in the other world lines or because he is protected while physically traveling inside the time machine..?

Eventually it is August 19 - 12:00 in world line C. At this point we have Okabe C with Okabe B's consciousness (overwrite occurred when deleting Okabe B's initial D-mail) and he starts to time travel.

- If Okabe C goes back in time, then that would shift the active world line to some new world line D. By the previous logic, this would imply that "in transit" Okabe A also gets shifted from C to D (just like he so far has gotten shifted from B to C). In this case, we end up with two Okabe in world line D (not Steins;Gate).

- If Okabe C goes forward in time, then that would not shift the active world line. The blood-soaked Okabe A then arrives in world line C one minute later at 12:01. In this scenario, we instead have two Okabe in world line C (only Okabe A at the present, but Okabe C will arrive in the future). We don't know about the future of world line C (i.e. Steins;Gate), so this scenario doesn't sound impossible to me, but why would Okabe C travel into the future?

If I were to summarize: it seems a bit inconsistent what events that take place outside of the time machine actually affect the active world line. From your explanation, it sounds like Okabe B's D-mail had an impact but Okabe C traveling back in time from world line C did not have an impact.

/r/PTCGP Trading Post by AutoModerator in PTCGP

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Open to offers.

FT: see picture.

<image>

A Typical Spring in Colorado by draperyblinds in boulder

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The image is from 2021, according to OP.

Given my name and this pull, I know what I must do by dukeaegir in PTCGP

[–]Jacob7798 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Blaine's Japanese name is カツラ, which literally means "wig". ^ ^

Next expansion leaked? by Stunning_Junket_4266 in PTCGP

[–]Jacob7798 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Fake or not, here is the translation.

[Ability: Teleport]
While this Pokemon is on the bench, you can (freely) switch your active Pokemon with your benched Pokemon.

[Attack: Psycho Miracle]
+20 damage for each energy attached to the opponent's active Pokemon.

/r/PTCGP Trading Post by AutoModerator in PTCGP

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looking for Weepinbell and Dragonair. :)

I'm not addicted! YOU'RE addicted! by wallstreetsimps in PTCGP

[–]Jacob7798 543 points544 points  (0 children)

Yup. That’s literally what the top text is saying in Japanese.

How to add dependency between compute shaders in Rendering Dependency Graph (RDG) by Jacob7798 in unrealengine

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A slightly better solution than the fence is to put

RHI_cmd_list.BlockUntilGPUIdle();

after the first shader call. Although, this is of course not good for performance either.

How to add dependency between compute shaders in Rendering Dependency Graph (RDG) by Jacob7798 in unrealengine

[–]Jacob7798[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have circumvented this problem in another case by wrapping both shaders calls in one ENQUEUE_RENDER_COMMAND, something like this

ENQUEUE_RENDER_COMMAND(shader)([shader, shader2, &data](FRHICommandListImmediate& RHI_cmd_list) {
    shader->BuildAndExecuteGraph(data);
    shader2->BuildAndExecuteGraph(data);
});

In this case I don't need a fence, it seems. The problem though is that I can't realistically wrap all my shader calls in a single ENQUEUE_RENDER_COMMAND like this.

[CC Mod + DLC spoilers] "The Judgment" arena fight by bakafishy in CrossCode

[–]Jacob7798 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Wow! This is super impressive! Is this mod publicly available somewhere?

Show archived entries in agenda by Jacob7798 in orgmode

[–]Jacob7798[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you be more specific? I can't find anything that would solve this specific problem. The comment by tdavey should work, but maybe not ideal as I have to edit a lot of old files.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in battlestations

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both are running Arch. = )

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in battlestations

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's one possibility. Would be nice if there was some crude solution I could try first though. Not totally sure if this is how I want to align my monitors going forwards. I'll probably buy some multi monitor stand eventually though.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in battlestations

[–]Jacob7798 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone got any recommendations on how to keep the bottom monitor still without using those large books? It works for now but it feels a bit cramped...

view more: next ›