Quote from tristancliffe :

We don't know every galaxy has a black hole in the middle. We don't know for sure than any have. All we know is that something doesn't quite add up in the middle with our existing knowledge. But then you get onto Dark Matter, p-branes, string and superstring theory; and you realise that an answer like 'there is a black hole in the middle' cannot in all probability be correct.

Will the blackhole, if it exists, consume the Milky Way? Who knows? Is the orbit of the galaxy declining or increasing (i.e. will it fly apart or be consumed).

The Discovery Channel takes very complicated facts, breaks them down to simple sections, lies a bit, uses fancy made-up graphics, and then people believe it. Don't - it's a channel for stupid people. By all means watch it, and learn about new things, but never take what they say as 'The Truth'.

i watched on bbc learning channel.They were making visual observations and did see it.(of course you can't see it but can understand that it is there by looking at the things around it.)

And isn't it obvious that there should be something there with incredible mass and gravity to keep the galaxy spining around? look at the shape of a galaxy.Anyone would easily realise that there's something in the middle pulling everything towards itself.

and, http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast29feb_1m.htm take a look at this pls.

and this : http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6937

I like watching discovery channel, but not stupid. And i don't like ppl calling everyone stupid.

Last edited by ZORER, Fri 1 Dec 2006, 14:26.

Quote from Gentlefoot :

Ofcourse we may well all have been compressed into an infinately small space by then. I don't think anyone (or anything) will survive that somehow. lol

Do you mean black hole?

every galaxy has a black hole at the very center of them. And those blackholes eat their galaxies.A time will come that our blackhole will eat all the milkyway. but that's far far far than a million year.

And yes, noone would survive that unless moving to another universe.



i luv discovery chnl.

Changing ourselves is the only way to conquer the universe(s).We must do that.

Maybe we'll find the "others" and share knowledge. They might teach us, everything we know now might be all wrong.


We're pathetic small creatures living short lifes fighting for small things...But after 1.000.000 years we might have grown a bit.


edit: o look my signature started to make sense in this thread

Too long to make a guess. But i think we'll be able to modify ourselves dna's so we can survive in any environment we like. Or even maybe we'll transfer our beeing into a chip and start living in a robot body. (we'll need antivirus

Quote from tristancliffe :

Yes, but with exceptions. Modern ECU's sometimes completely stop the injectors on overrun (when the engine is being turned primarily by the gearbox) with the throttle fully closed, but this is in the interests of economy and emissions (though I'm not sure of the benefits to emissions, as it seems like a boat of false promises to me).

But on 'older' cars, especially on carburettors, the fuelling was always on (and with carbs proportional to the pressure drop across the carbs caused by the throttle position and engine speed).

Also, in your example above, in case #1 the engine will restart delivering fuel around the idle rpm to try and stop it from stalling. The ECU will detect falling rpms (and probably won't know the car is in gear) and just try to maintain a smooth idle.

i see. Thanks for the explaining.

i know the basics,i know a bit more than basic actually. i think i should improve my english... let's start all over again,

1-if the car is in a gear and it is moving and you don't touch the throttle, the kinetic energy coming from the rotation of the wheels will go through the gearbox to the engine and keep the engine turning.
2-But if in neutral, no kinetic energy will come from the wheels because the gearbox won't transfer it.So the engine should be burning gas to keep turning.
nothing wrong with this.

Here comes the question, will the engine burn gas in the first condition?? i think yes.

Quote from Gentlefoot :

ECUs don't know what gear you are in. The map is the same in gear or not.

yea that's right.silly me.

But if you're in a gear and the car is moving that means all the valves and pumps are running depending on the crank. But in neutral, the engine should produce its own power and rotation to keep itself alive.


i don't know .

Quote from ZORER :

There is always gas burnt in the engine even if you don't touch the throttle while it is running.So it can keep the valves and things running.

I mean, in neutral. not in gear.

:rock_band

Good idea but server prices will double or more if ppl start making money out of sponsors.

Week mags,hmm.... well i prefer monthly mags actually

penthouse or playboy??

The green bar is not the throttle applied to the engine. It is the amount of pressure on your pedal.

There is always gas burnt in the engine even if you don't touch the throttle while it is running.So it can keep the valves and things running.And that makes the smoke coming out of the exhaust.

Edit: i mean in neutral.

Last edited by ZORER, Thu 30 Nov 2006, 11:00.

damn take the S2.(i'll have S3 in short time anyway)

listening to beyonce singing or being chased by bulldogs?

where's the voting?

i hate those people. They're very dangerous to motorbike drivers. They don't only risk their own life but also others lifes.
i hate them.they're illepall.

And that car doesn't have a driver in it. How can a car go or even spin without a driver???illepall

HUG HUG Blackout.

i agree.

Quote from Tweaker :

I dunno about you, but neon pink and black are pretty much highly contrasted against each other.

Show us some of your skins, or paintjobs that you prefer. I don't see how a 'simple' skin can be so beautiful when it comes to using one on a racecar.

Pink and black are contrast.But pink is not a "warning" color like red or yellow or bright green.it is not the same as those colors when used with black.

And the shapes are neat so they don't scramble my eyes. if it were real life cars, the resolution is infinite so you can use as many things as you like on the car skin. But if you're limited to a 1024x1024 bitmap, those things start to disturb you.

Quote from Taavi(EST) :

Before going to school, i felt like ogling at the XRR, and then i just had to share my desperation with u guys illepall

i like the first one.

Quote from maczo :

Then you haven't seen Pink not Gay skins
No gallery to show them though, only a small sample on our homepage (link in signature)

Yea that 's pretty simple nice design. Simple and neat. No aggressive contrasts and shapes. Imo, bigger organic shapes could be used like the one on the door instead of the pink parts on the bumper etc...

+1

Quote from Don :

:eye-poppi Today i found a film camera with really old film in it and fisheye lens, so i took it for a test

http://don.vn.cz/s2/fisheye/

i think there's too much deformation on the geometry.Should be used with hi-poly meshes.

Question is : "Which team has the best skins?"

My answer is : None of them.

Quote from Tweaker :

And as if real race cars have any better designs than we do? illepall Some of these skinners could probably make a living out of skinning a real racecar, they know how-to wrap things nicely, and it isn't just about decals and changing colors, it is the use of space. Many good skinners seem to know how-to do that for team skins, and they want a cool looking car. If you personally like "simple" skins, that's just your own taste. To me, a racecar needs to look like a proper racecar with an interesting livery and enough decals to top it off (not too little, nor too much). There are many teams that have a unique look, and most are really nicely done. And no team has the same skin just with "changed colors", that's absurd.

That's your opinion.illepall
And real race cars have to have logos and things on because they make money out of that. No team would like to have some others logo on their car if they didn't get money out of that.
And yes many many of lfs teams have the basic skin style just like each other, lines lines lines and logos logos logos...

i won't vote for any team because they seem to have all the same skins just changed colors. Nobody likes simple designs.They are all the same. High contrast colours, lots of lots of decals, millions of logos, complicated and badly designed lines....(there are some nice ones in my skins_x folder but i don't see them around much)

Skins should be made by real designers, not by anyone who knows how to use photoshop.

sorry guys.

Quote from Tomas Stiborek :

http://www.felix.stiborek.info/lfs_pics/fxo_so/

very nice set of work