The goddamn long jump module. Also, pretty much anything about headcrabs (those tiny hind legs don’t give near enough leverage to jump up to head height, and that’s not even getting into how they turn people into zombies in the first place). Also, pretty much anything about the Vorts (Lightning hands WTF? Maybe they have electric eel muscles in their hands, but then it wouldn’t acually make a bolt of lightning, just a sort of stun area. That and their apparently psychic powers). I guess maybe the Gargantua is supposed to work like a gigantic pistol shrimp, but fluid physics with gases don’t work quite like fluid physics with liquids and I doubt it would work. Oh yeah, and the HL2 crossbow has enough force to fling a fully grown human being PLUS heavy cyborg augments PLUS armor hundreds of feet backwards using nothing but momentum and a seven-inch steel rod.
All the techno-babble about “manipulating ionic phase arrays” and bullcrap like that.
But anyway, Half-Life isn’t supposed to be 100% scientifically accurate. It’s a fun puzzle/shooter with memorable characters and a creative story. Complaining that it’s scientifically inaccurate goes nowhere. Just enjoy the damn game.
I saw nothing to hint that the HL2 crossbow used alien technology.
A battery hooked up to a piece of rebar is pretty low tech. I cannot say from personal experience how much juice is needed to make it orange-hot, though. I’ll give you that one Dan, some kind of alien power cell, hooked up to a mechanism obviously designed and built on Earth.
Still doesn’t make sense how it flings guys back so far, but eh, it’s a video game, it doesn’t have to make sense.
Assuming the crossbow is 100% man-made and not stolen from Combine-technology. After all, as soon as the piece of rebar hits the charging unit, it immediately glows orange. Even if you heated rebar to glowing orange, it would take a certain amount of time to heat it up from ambient temperature. It could be powered by depleted uranium (there’s a box where the rebar connects) apparently powered by a regular alkaline battery.
Besides, it’s the future (or the alternate future once we get passed the time this allegedly happens) – anything is possible!
The only thing I don’t like about the HL2 crossbow is sometimes if it hits something weirdly or something that was moving (and not humanoid), the rebar model is wedged into the place where the model was…but now is floating in space.
OMG wow. This might be a long reply if you really want me to go there. I was just having a laugh before, but I’m happy to point out all the impossibilities in HL if you want. Let me be clear though, I’m not putting the game down at all. It’s no worse than science fiction anywhere else. I love the game, and find science fiction fun. However, because you asked, I’ll happily rip it to shreads.
Let me start of by clarifying that I actually am a qualified physicist, specifically an astrophysicist, so this is legitimately my field of expertise.
Physics that is broken:
Teleportation. Straight away, impossible. Even if you theoretically could accelerate something to the speed of light near instantaneously AND it survived that acceleration, the length of time the travel would take would be ages as far as the people who put you in the teleporter are concerned (it would be instantaneous for the person being accelerated though). It’s stated that teleportation occurs via Xen which must be at least several light years away (potentially tens thousands of light years, and that’s only IF it’s in the Milky Way), so it would take years as far as time on Earth is concerned. There is no such thing as instantaneous travel, or teleportation in the classic science fiction sense, it’s purely science fiction. As are wormholes, I might add. Even if the “teleporters” didn’t operate via Xen and were direct, you’d still need a clear pathway to fire someone toward - they’re not just simply going to travel through walls etc. Unless you want to prove Einstein wrong, teleportation is flat out breaking physics.
Gluon Gun. A gun that fires gluons? Really?!?! Gluons are particles that propogate the strong force. They exist inside protons and neutrons; they are the particle that holds that quarks together in the stable form of these subatomic particles. You can’t just have gluons by themselves. As their name suggests, they act like glue, immediately reacting with anything that can have strong interactions, which accounts for most fundamental particles. Beyond impossible.
Xen. According to Combine Overwiki, Xen is a collection of asteroids inside a nebula (presumably a planetary nebula). There’s decent gravity there. It’s absurd. Those rocks have negligible mass and thus negligible gravity, and if they were close enough to the nebula’s projenitor white dwarf to feel a gravtational effect, they’d be falling in very rapidly. The whole breathable atmosphere thing is ridiculous as well. Sure there’d be some atmosphere, but it would be mostly helium and hydrogen with possibly tiny traces of carbon, oxygen and nitrogen, but they’d be very small. It could be a supernova remnant and not a planetary nebula, in which case there’d be heavier gaseous elements, but these would include a lot of metals. So from breathing you’d get heavy metal poisoning. If you were in the part of the remnant where the gas was thick enough to breath, the temperature would be so high you’d die instantly anyway.
The gravity gun. WTF?!?!?!?! Straight up, WTF?! That really does not make any physical sense. It can’t operate using the strong or weak forces, as they only work on scales smaller than Angstroms. That leaves gravity and electromagnetism. Gravity? No. That would require a shit ton of mass and would just start fucking everything else around you, including you. Don’t think the gun has the ability to just create mass. EM? How? It would have to electrically charge an object first, or induce a current in it (which just wouldn’t happen for a crate). In any case, not physically viable.
There are a raft of other weaponary things like the secondary fire of the Pulse Rifle that just don’t make any sense. And the Vorts creating electricity is pretty bullshit. You could potentially come up with a biochemical theory for how it might be possible though, so the concept isn’t impossible. Simply saying “they’re aliens” isn’t an explanation, though. Even aliens have to abide by physics, funnily enough. It’s not a case of “them being from elsewhere in space means we can’t understand”, because we can definitely understand when things aren’t physics.
As for the unintelligble jargon, here’s a few examples of things in the game that don’t actually mean anything and are just a collection of terms that by themselves might have scientific meaning:
Resonance Cascade
Anti-Mass Spectrometer
Interdimensional travel
Zero Point Energy Field Manipulator
I know there are more, by that’s all I can think of off the top of my head right now. Satisfied? I don’t actually enjoy declaring how unrealistic my favourite game is, but it would be so ridiculously ignorant to think that half the stuff in the game was in any way realistic, or that most of it even made scientific sense, or were even theoretically possible.
Sure. That’s what they WANT you think! Don’t bother making a gluon gun or a zero point energy field manipulator or looking for wormholes folks. It’s “impossible”.
Xen is not a planet, it’s another dimension. The Combine, Nihilanth, and Vortigaunts are from another dimension. There are at least three that we know about, probably more, since Xen has the habit of collecting random bits from various dimensions.
Back to my point, Xen isn’t light years away, because it exists on a different plane. If you have the energy to tunnel through to another dimension, it would stand to reason that the amount of energy it would take to open the portal to different coordinates would be negligible.
That said, I agree, from what we know about science right now, teleportation isn’t possible, and isn’t really feasible, unless all (some?) of these theories about dimensions end up being true and we somehow figure out how to travel between them.
Teleportation is possible. Ithas been done before, if only in very small amounts. Theoretically, large-scale teleportation is most definitely possible, just EXTREMELY difficult, and next-to-impossible with the technology we have today.
And heck, it’s a game, not real life. It can break physics if it wants to.
If you’re a “Macro” Physicist, then I can somewhat understand where you’re comming from. Teleportation is already a very real and commonly occurring phenomenon in the quantum world (Entanglement-assisted Teleportation). Now, of course, you cannot teleport things faster than the speed of light, which is why you imaginably couldn’t explain how Gordon got there so fast.
But here’s a word of advice, the Wiki is sometimes wrong. Xen is indeed a shitload of asteroids, but in an other diemension. The E.A.T. took him to a POINT in another dimension that was ‘spatially’ close, which is why it only took a few seconds for Gordon to teleport there.
As for the Gluon Gun:
No. It does not fire a jet of gluens. That’s just its nickname.
Whatever it REALLY fires is aimed at annihilating or greatly weakening the gluons at hold the sub-atomic structures in place. (Hence the bodily explosion when you fire it a a living being).
I’ll give you the Jargon point, I missed that.
As for the basis to your entire argument:
Physics is generally the study of observing the mechanical methods in which our Universe works. You have stated in your retort that some of the shit just doesn’t make sense, to you (Gravity Gun/Vortigaunts). Most of the ideas in Physics are just that, ideas, theories. Nothing is EVER set in stone, and is ALWAYS perviable to change. And is wrong for any physicist to judge those theories as if they’re law.
Half-Life is just a game made in 1998. It’s not going to be full-proof realistic.
But the math and Physics behind a lot of it is.
That’s the part I like the most. Scientific dogmatism is something that not only bothers me, but scares me so much that I wrote a paper on it last semester… It is vehemently anti-scientific. I don’t like when people use the word IMPOSSIBRU as a synonym for “extremely unlikely given the current consensus interpreting the evidence”.
Bahumut didn’t use the bad synonym; he actually clarified the context behind why he thinks it is not possible, and made it clear that such a perspective is subject to change–science.
Sigh. This whole concept of “another dimension” isn’t even a real concept at all. It’s again just jargon used in science fiction. Please enlighten me as to what you think “another dimension” is. Science fiction often portrays the idea like a parallel universe. I’ve heard some people say the idea of parallel universes is something that might be worth looking into, but the vast majority of physicist who I work don’t see it. And these aren’t stubborn people. Cynical, perhaps, but by no means stubborn and stuck on things being one way.
It is light years away. It’s in the universe. It can’t not be in the universe. For it to not be in the universe would make even less sense. Again, the idea of “tunneling through dimensions” really comes from the idea of worm holes. Worm holes are in Star Trek and Stargate, not real life. It’s not a matter of how much energy you have. If you want to pursue the idea of there being more than 4 dimensions, join the string theory brigade. You’ll have to study for at least 5 years first though.
I’m well aware of these experiments and results. I was trying to make the point that teleportation in the classic sense, known to the majority of people who have only had exposure to science fiction and not real physics, that instantaneous travel is possible, is completely incorrect. Also, this form of teleportation is where information on the construction of something is sent via electromagnetic waves (just like pretty much all communication technology) and the thing is reconstructed at the site. Humans wouldn’t survive this. Even if they did, you be getting into hugely debated areas of philosphy (and biophysics) as to whether it would even be the same person that comes out the other side.
I also stated very clearly, more than once, that I’m fine with the game doing it. Some smart ass had the nerve to suggest that things were physically viable in the game, so I’m just making a point. I love the game, and find science fiction fun. But people are really naive to think that half this stuff is theoretically possible.
Same as before. First part, yes. Second part, no. Agreed the Wiki might not be 100% accurate when it comes to HL, but you’re again getting into either string theory, which has a lot of work to be done before it becomes a viable theory (if it ever does), or worm holes which are pure science fiction.
Oh, and to be clear, I’m not a “macro” physicist per se. Whilst astrophysics is my main area, I do also study quantum and other fields too. I work with physics on all scales.
Fair enough, it doesn’t say anywhere that they do fire gluons; I was getting a bit excited there. But indeed it’s just jargon.
Incorrect. There are fundamentals which are laws. General Relativity has NEVER failed a test and is one of the few cornerstones of physics. Breaking that is impossible.
I absolutely hate it when people claim that everything is just “theoretical” and you can never know for certain. What a load of shit. This isn’t a personal comment at all, but 99% of people who say that don’t even understand the definition of scientific theory. It really pisses me off, especially when it comes from those who have absolutely no scientific background whatsoever. There are plenty of concepts that have been proven to death. I appreciate that about 100 years ago people thought that everything had been discovered, and that that was prior to the uncovering of relativity or quantum mechanics (which are the only real theories of physics; everything else is derived from them), but I’m not naive such that I believe we’re at that point again. However, the physics that was around prior to then was not wrong. It turned out to be an approximation of the truth, but the truth nonetheless. It’s possible there are some examples where the mathematics that govern physical laws are actually only being observed in limiting cases (a known example is Newtonian gravity), but once you’ve actually gone through the mathematics of relativity, you begin to realise how unlikely that could be.
Again, of course it’s not going to be realistic. It’s not designed to be. Nothing that’s science fiction ever is. There is no issue with the game being as it is. This was never part of my point at all. But the majority of the science is unrealistic/impossible. The in game mechanics are good, but the conteptual physics in the game is total fiction.
There are some scientists who can be quite dogmatic, but it is very naive to think that our fundamental laws of physics are incorrect. Most scientists aren’t like this at all. There’s a very thorough thing called the scientific method that keeps us in line with our results and how we declare when something is fact. Sure, not every finding is right. Hell, I found a mistake from a well-cited paper just last week. Turns out I wasn’t the first to pick up on it, but still plenty of others who used it didn’t realise. These things are often minor though, and don’t fuck with really fundamental things like relativity.
There honestly comes a point when something has been so bloody well tested that it becomes law and it becomes impossible to break. And “impossibru”? At first I just took that as a typo, but the r and l keys are quite far away from another, as are the e and u keys.
Regardless, if you take the opinion that nothing is certain and therefore is anything is possible, then that kind of defeats the purpose of science. Well, not entirely, as scientists don’t really care too much if a few people are of that opinion, but you can never claim that something is viable on the off chance that science got it wrong, but I’m sure you get my point. If you gather evidence and test things to death to the point of being proven and you choose not to accept the facts, then what the fuck is wrong with you (that’s a universal “you”, not a personal attack) frankly?
The fact is science is literally all theory. We can test it against our own perceptions, but there is absolutely nothing to prove our perception of the universe is correct, if you want to get philisophical about it.
We just have to commit to our present understanding of things because it works, and we don’t really have a choice.
Normally I would agree with you. I wouldn’t think it’s possible, but I’ve never studies physics and don’t really care to, it just doesn’t interest me. But the thing here is, dimensions/universes that are not ours, if they exist, could contain anything. If we were to somehow create a wormhole/portal/whatever to some theoretical clump of asteroids floating in a void near some giant single celled organisms, shit would get crazy, if they were in our universe or not.
I accept the possibility of crazy universes/dimensions for story purposes and don’t write huge posts arguing how a fictional story having fiction in it is a bad thing.
You’ve missed the point. I’ve already stressed this at least five times, there being fiction is not a bad thing. I like it. It’s fun. My original comment that started this was just a little fun stab at the unreal nature of things. It was never a negative attitude toward the game. My responses were because someone on the forum actually thought some of the stuff was legit. Obviously in science fiction you can say whatever the fuck you want and take advantage of things that are either not confirmed or can never be confirmed, or even use stuff that’s proven bullshit. No issue with that. People should be aware that some of things there simply can not happen. Indeed some remain in the realm of possibility though.
I don’t like your first sentence. Science is just as much about experimentation as it is theory. I realise you didn’t intend for your sentence to sound like this, but the majority of people who read that would think that such a statement implies everything is bullshit. These would be the less intelligent portion of the population, but frustratingly, they make up the majority.
Proving that “our perception of the universe is correct” would be like trying to prove there’s a god. By definition of the task it’s impossible. So saying that it can’t be done is a meaningless statement. I honestly don’t feel there’s much a philosophical debate there. I’ve had these sorts of discussions with people before, and, perhaps I’m rather cynical, but the way scientific experimentation is conducted is such that the results should declare the same conclusion regardless of your perception. I don’t think my perception would differ any more to another species on another planet made primarily of silicon anymore than they would to you. But if we were both scientists and conducted the same experiment, we would find the same result. It’s intentionally designed to be that way. It’s not allowed to be another way. That’s at the philosophical roots of what makes science science.
Indeed we have to commit to our present understanding. I wouldn’t say it’s about not having a choice. You could choose not to accept things that are widely accepted. The reason that’s frowned upon is because it’s anti-progressive. If everything was constantly questioned and never accepted, we’d never get anywhere. And some things are frequently questioned. But, as I said in my last big post, there comes a time when something is written in stone, so to speak.
I will add though, that in my journey of becoming a scientist, one of the very first things I learnt is that you have to be completely willing to disregard everything you think you know about something. If you don’t have that mindset, then you can end up missing breakthroughs or corrections. However, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be sure of what you know, for if you’re not, you’ll have terrible efficiency at improving understanding or discovering new things. My whole spiel about there being fundamentals that you can’t fuck with were really directed at the core concepts of general and special relativity. There’s still plenty of physics that’s been around since prior to then that is not set in stone like relativity is. Though I understand that if one is not familiar with the concepts, the specificity of my argument might not be of concern. The point remains though.
Not really, they’d read the whole paragraph and take it within context. The fact you generalise everyone like that and as below your intelligence, and the fact you read the first scentence and got annoyed shows your simply going in to the discussion for an argument, and reafirms the view your quite full of yourself.
Talk to philosophers or take a philosophy class and you’l LEARN the philisophical debate therein. Your feelings aren’t universally applicable to everyone elses train of thought.
The rest of that paragraph shows you don’t understand the argument.
Again you take things out of context. The choice is merely in regard to the way people within society and society itself works, as well as our own insignificance, powerlessness and clueslessness in the universe in general.
Apply that to the way you view life in general and you might actually be on to something important for yourself.
One doesn’t need to be unfamiliar with the concepts for one to not be concerned.
The fact is you took a dig at ficional science and it just comes of as ostentatious, and people will just see you as conceited. Your condescension just reafirms it.
The most annoying part is though is the way you say…
When you’ve been spouting this on the same page…
It simply just reaks of hipocrisy and first year college student who can’t control his own ego in response to his new found knowledge.
Because after you escape from the lab you enter a wierd other dimension with floating rocks. In fact, that’s later in the game. After you escape the lab you run around New Mexico for a while first.
Hi everyone, i’ve been reading this forum for a couple of month now, and theses last days i followed this debate with high interest as i’m studying physics myself. I apologize yet for my lame english, i’m french so…
Anyway the point is, i couldn’t help but get register and get into the debate to stick with Blushot when i read this:
Nothing personnal, perhaps i’m mistaking but i don’t think you studied science if you say that. Believe me, he’s not a college student. When it comes to the point that you have studied general relativity and find mistakes in a published paper, you are at least in master and, much more likely, in phd or post-doc, if not in post. You do actual science. I am in second year undergrad, you can pretend i am a “college student who can’t control his own ego” if you really want to, but you just can’t say the same about blushot, it’s ridiculous. Also, calm down and, please, do not use personnal attacks…
Also, i wanted to enter the debate because, alone as he was, some people could have thought blushot was just a “stubborn patronizing extremist” (i exagerate but you see the point). He’s not. Not at all. I totally agree with most of what he said. Particularly this:
I’m sorry but saying that science is literally all theory proves that you don’t really understand what science is (this is not a personnal attack by the way). What triggers the scientific process is experience. What prevails over theory and validates/unvalidates the results is experience. In France, because it’s a country of mathematicians, we have the tendancy to put imagination and theories at the beggining of the scientific process, which is quite wrong. Experience (along with mathematical coherence) is what guarantees scientist he’s not saying complete bullshit.
Also, please, drop it with the argument “scientists are dogmatic because they say x or y is impossible”, it’s an argument overused by crackpots to justify anythinh, especially bullshit like, say, “Einstein was wrong, ether is real!” or “A video on youtube shows a perpetual motion device so it works, thermodynamics is wrong!”…
Well, to get on-topic, as for blushot, i think half-life is an awesome game and, in my opinion the greater game ever. It’s not realistic, that’s it, and that’s not an issue at all.
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.
