A lot of people think that to get to orbit, you just have to go up, but actually you need to go sideways.
Imagine throwing a ball that leaves a visual trail behind it. You throw it straight up, it comes straight back down and just leaves a vertical line. Throw it across the room, and it makes an arc. Take it outside, throw it really hard, and it makes a bigger arc. Zoom the camera out, and throw it so hard it goes over the horizon. It leaves a pretty long arc right? If you throw it hard enough, that arc goes farther and farther past the horizon until it misses the ground entirely and comes right back around to you. That’s an orbit!
But that’s only part of it. You see, any time you impart force on an object in orbit, you only change its trajectory, not its current position. Since your arm is now the lowest part in the ball’s orbit, you can never raise that point above where your arm is. But you can affect the other side of its orbit–the faster you throw the ball, the higher the opposite side of the orbit gets. Let’s head up to the highest point in the ball’s orbit, and give it another push. Again, that doesn’t affect its current position, but it does affect its trajectory. Making the ball go faster forward increases height at the opposite side of its orbit, so if we push it with the right amount of force, we can make its orbit circular!
Now you know enough to get a rocket to space! Well, kind of. You also need to know about fuel and the tyranny of the rocket equation, but that can wait until you play Kerbal Space Program or get a job at NASA
Let’s imagine we’re in a rocket ship in a circular orbit, and we want to go back to earth. You might think you need to point towards the ground and turn your engine on, but remember how we got up here–we’re in orbit because we’re going sideways very fast. The most efficient way to come down is to point backward along our orbit and slow ourselves down, to lower the height at the opposite side.
What happens if we do point straight downward? Well, we would start going downward, but because we aren’t pointing straight backward, we aren’t actually reducing our speed, only changing the direction of the orbit. It would take much more energy to come back to earth this way, and because we aren’t actually reducing our speed, it would be much more dangerous, because we would be entering the atmosphere faster than if we had pointed backwards instead.
In a worst case scenario, we would run out of fuel before re-entering the atmosphere. This is very bad, because as we fall towards the earth, we start moving faster. Remember how moving faster at the lowest point in an orbit increases the height of the highest point? If we don’t hit the atmosphere, the top of our orbit will end up even higher than it was before!
Idk I feel like chaotic neutral would be something surprising without being much more likely to be negative for someone else than neutral. Something actually random would be a note like “look in your socks” or a random phone number
You just do whatever you want when you want without regard for whether it’s legal, so like, just letting your Eagle go at the dog park and not caring if he eats a terrier
Excuse me? Rimuru-sama has chosen his form to honour a deceased comrade and can change back to his slimy self whenever he pleases. He is not trapped in anything. If anything, he’s a trap. For anyone with a proper taste in men and men-like gelatinous creatures.
This stuff is back again? A year or two ago FB and the like was littered with spammers posting fake news that some celeb or other had died or met some tragedy to get people to click it. This stuff is annoying as heck, there’s plenty of spammers, but for some reason this particular brand seems very ubiquitous.
It’s because the sites refuse to police misinformation in any form. You want attention on that, you have to say something that someone in charge of that cares about. Falsely reporting their death is an easy, legal and fun way to make a content moderator or site owner or CEO pause and say “hey wait a minute”
Just an aside, it’s still impressive to me with all the technical limitations they had, they were still able to make Mario feel so damn floaty swimming through the water levels.
I think modern developers are in some ways stifled by an aimless lack of limitations.
Creative constraints is the term you’re looking for
It’s absolutely a thing - they do it for creative writing and game jams, and it’s very effective.
Programming is inherently creative, even if we don’t think of it that way. You start learning the basic use, then you get into very rudimentary designs - at that stage, you transition from problem solving to creating a design that solves a problem.
Constraints help - if you pick what we call an opinionated framework, it limits and guides you. It tells you how pieces fit together, and ideally it doesn’t limit you, but it does make some things much easier and others harder.
Nintendo had an extremely opinionated engine in that time - they were still drawing the maps out on paper in a grid, then scanning it with custom hardware.
These days, you open up godot, and you get a blank screen. You could make anything, 2d or 3d, a game or a tool, and it just gives you the tools. You could build a tile map for a 2d game, or a terrain for 3d, you can set the camera wherever you want. You can have multiple cameras, multiple maps - you can do anything
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.