The AI-generated cat pictures thread
10-04-2012, 03:24 PM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,019
Total Cats: 6,587
I presume that the advantage here (versus a conventional solid motor) is that it can be throttled and/or shut down in the event that something bad happens?
I'm curious to know how the pump is powered. Usually on a liquid fueled rocket, they inject fuel/oxy into a separate combustion chamber to spin the pump turbine.
A third engine, a 750 hp (560 kW) 2.4 Litre Cosworth CA2010 Formula 1 V8 petrol engine, is used as an auxiliary power unit and to drive the oxidiser pump for the rocket.
A 750 HP, F1-engine powered fuel pump. Bad-***.
The fuel pump:
The engine connected to the fuel pump on a test-stand:
http://www.bloodhoundssc.com/project...osworth-ca2010
http://www.bloodhoundssc.com/project.../rocket-engine
Very, VERY carefully.
Reply
0
0
10-04-2012, 04:23 PM
I honestly had a really hard time telling the difference between HDMI and VGA. If I painted up a screen which had a high-contrast test pattern (such as the old Indian-Head camera cards from the 1950s) then I could discern a little bit of fuzz in the really high-pitch areas, but for general-purpose use (eg: web surfing, gaming) I found VGA to be essentially indistinguishable from HDMI.
Reply
0
0
10-04-2012, 04:53 PM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,019
Total Cats: 6,587
Here is my desk at the lab:
Both of these monitors are identical 19" HANNS-G units, purchased at the same time from the same vendor. They are operating at 1280 x 1024. One of them is being fed VGA, the other DVI.
Looking at them side by side, it is really quite difficult to tell the difference. There is a definate disparity in the color fidelity, which is noticeable if you drag a window such that it is split between the two. But in terms of the sharpness / clarity of text, you'd he very hard-pressed to figure out which one is which.
I'm sure that many different factors are at play here. Some monitors may process a VGA signal better than others. Some graphics cards may produce a cleaner / stronger electrical output than others. Some VGA cables might have a higher capacitance or poorer shielding than others.
I'm not calling you a liar, or questioning your judgement. I'm sure that one of your monitors does indeed look like crap.
My point is simply that a blanket condemnation such as "VGA will work over 1360x768 but you can tell it looks like crap vs a DVI or HDMI" is not well-founded. The pixel rate (pixels vs. time) of my 4:3 monitors at 1280x1024 is higher than that of your hypothetical (and presumably 16:9) monitors at 1360x768. And yet the one being fed with VGA must assuredly does not "look like crap" as compared to the other. It's virtually indistinguishable, in fact.
My experiance at home was quite similar, in that after switching from HDMI to VGA for my 28" 1920 x 1280 monitor, the difference in quality was so utterly insignificant that I was almost hard-pressed to spend the $4.12 plus shipping for the DVI-HDMI adapter from Monoprice.com.
Reply
0
0
10-04-2012, 05:48 PM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,019
Total Cats: 6,587
First, I was quoting you directly re: 1360x768.
Second, I re-iterate the fact that for a while I was running my 28" monitor at home on VGA, with a resolution of 1920 x 1280, and I was *barely* able to discern a difference.
Third, I repeat that I fully expect there to be some variation between monitors and video cards of different brand/model, such that some may display VGA very poorly, and others may do it quite well.
Finally remember that because VGA is an ANALOG format, it is more technically complex to transmit and to receive, particularly in the case of an LCD monitor. The video card contains digital-to-analog converters and the LCD monitor contains analog-to-digital converters, and these must all operate at a very high speed, supporting very high slew rates while avoiding ringing, and operating with extremely low noise and jitter. From an engineering perspective, this is less easy than simply building an LVDS transciever to pass digital data.
Since this all started with a discussion of CRT monitors (post # 13704, in which Full_Tilt_Boogie asked about dredging up an old CRT monitor.) Using LCD monitors as a basis for comparison of the two formats inherently invalidates the comparison, as a CRT monitor, being analog in nature does not require the receive-end analog to digital conversion. Thus, the problems which afflict the display of analog video on an LCD monitor simply do not apply in the domain of a CRT monitor, as it is not required to convert the analog information into digital data and format it into a fixed-resolution display in the first place.
The funny thing is that I bought those monitors myself out-of-pocket, because Harris was "upgrading" everyone to 16:9 displays at that time. Call me a luddite, but I find that the 4:3 format simply works better in dual-monitor applications. The only reason I switched to LCD in the first place was that my old 20" CRTs were finally giving out.
Sidebar: Amusingly, I am the only one here in the office with a habit of plastering post-it notes all over their monitor. I assumed that this made me a retard (or at least, special), so it's funny to see all y'all doing the same.
Second, I re-iterate the fact that for a while I was running my 28" monitor at home on VGA, with a resolution of 1920 x 1280, and I was *barely* able to discern a difference.
Third, I repeat that I fully expect there to be some variation between monitors and video cards of different brand/model, such that some may display VGA very poorly, and others may do it quite well.
Finally remember that because VGA is an ANALOG format, it is more technically complex to transmit and to receive, particularly in the case of an LCD monitor. The video card contains digital-to-analog converters and the LCD monitor contains analog-to-digital converters, and these must all operate at a very high speed, supporting very high slew rates while avoiding ringing, and operating with extremely low noise and jitter. From an engineering perspective, this is less easy than simply building an LVDS transciever to pass digital data.
Since this all started with a discussion of CRT monitors (post # 13704, in which Full_Tilt_Boogie asked about dredging up an old CRT monitor.) Using LCD monitors as a basis for comparison of the two formats inherently invalidates the comparison, as a CRT monitor, being analog in nature does not require the receive-end analog to digital conversion. Thus, the problems which afflict the display of analog video on an LCD monitor simply do not apply in the domain of a CRT monitor, as it is not required to convert the analog information into digital data and format it into a fixed-resolution display in the first place.
I forgot there are poor people working for poor companies that don't buy them high quality 23" 1080p lcds for there web surfing.
Sidebar: Amusingly, I am the only one here in the office with a habit of plastering post-it notes all over their monitor. I assumed that this made me a retard (or at least, special), so it's funny to see all y'all doing the same.
Reply
0
0
10-04-2012, 07:58 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Maryville TN
Posts: 878
Total Cats: 79
Reply
0
0
