Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
HowardC wrote:
But what they do and how you use them is often completely different. It makes things quite counter-intuitive.
Most emulators were not written with universality (with each other) in mind, so Lua can't do any better. That's the way it is, unfortunately.
BizHawk strives to be as universal as possible, so Lua is probably more consistent there. I haven't tested though.
Probably it is unintuitive because, if you take a random point on the Earth, the probability that the opposite side is the exact same temperature, or similarly, the probability that the wind is nothing, is 0.
It's quite easy to get two opposite points not at the same temperature and just as easy to get a point with wind on it, so...
The idea with these unintuitive results is that the use of a continuous parameter like temperature or wind (itself not always intuitive) enforces the existence of some point on the sphere satisfying some condition(s). Also, these are existence (nonconstructive) theorems; existence theorems aren't exactly intuitive.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
nEilfox wrote:
I'd like to improve my movie BUT,
I think my movie is not enough entertainment.
Or the game doesn't suit to make a TAS.
How to do next?
I think the game is quite entertaining. If it is not too hard, you can try to improve it.
Edit: I think you should get the XY coordinate item at 1:37, since it is a 100% run.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
There seems to be a bug with Hex Editor in BizHawk 1.5.3 where, when an address is frozen (space key, or "Freeze Address"), the emulator will replace the number with the last two digits of its decimal value as if it were hexadecimal (e.g. 0x10 -> 0x16). The bug appears to be in [MOD EDIT]BizHawk 1.6.0-beta[/MOD EDIT] as well, but it occurs when unfreezing the address instead of freezing it.
Thank you very much!
With this information, I figured out that the Pokerus routine in Gold/Silver is at 2C95D (B:495D). Furthermore, the Pokerus check occurs at the end of battle after KOing or catching a wild Pokemon, and at the end of a trainer battle which the player has won. There is no check when running away from battle, or when losing (white out) to a trainer.
I used the debugger BGB to verify this (since vba-sdl-h only works with GBA).
Edit: When catching a wild Pokemon, the game will add this Pokemon to your party before running the Pokerus routine.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Kurabupengin wrote:
Thats the box that included the disc. It says free in spanish, so it counts?
A game is not freeware if it is a gratis product inside a box that costs something. If the whole box itself costs nothing and is part of a free distribution campaign, then perhaps it is freeware. Otherwise, it is safer to say that it is not freeware.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Radiant wrote:
Warepire wrote:
I was referring to the unique value part, the first proper RTS TAS would also have unique value as a run.
There are many RTS games in the world, and only few games where the designers put in a hidden difficulty mode that's intended to be completely impossible.
As I see it, Warepire's point is that being unique, by itself, does not equate to being entertaining or worthy of a star. Unique does not always mean good. See this Mario World hack. Certainly it is greatly unique (and intended to be impossible), but how many would see a TAS of such a hack as entertaining, let alone star-worthy?
Anyway, I think a good question would be: If a person watched this TAS without knowing anything about the game or its background (joke difficulty being supposedly impossible/how the game works), would that person be impressed by this TAS?
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
rhebus wrote:
EDIT: I think I got it. First: show that the equal temperature contour joins a point with its opposite: this can be done by a symmetry argument because f(point opposite x) = -f(x), so the contour will join two symmetrical halves of the sphere and each point opposite a point on the contour will itself be on the contour.
I think this doesn't cover the case where there are disjoint zero contours.
How I remember the solution given was by the function h(x)=(f(x)-f(-x),g(x)-g(-x)), where f and g are temperature and elevation (-x means point opposite x). If there exists x such that h(x)=(0,0), then there are two opposite points on the sphere with equal temperature and elevation. Otherwise, suppose that there is no such x.
Let b(θ, t) be the half-great-circle on the sphere going from latitude 90° (at t=0) to latitude -90° (at t=1) along the longitude angle θ. Then h(b(0°, t)) is a path on two-dimensional space from a point (r,s)≠(0,0) to the point (-r,-s), not through (0,0). Likewise, h(b(180°, t)) also goes from (r,s) to (-r,-s), but on the "opposite side" of h(b(θ, t)). The argument is then that, as θ ranges from 0° to 180°, h(b(θ,t)) undergoes a "continuous deformation", and that is not possible without going through (0,0). This can be formalized by considering the angular displacement of the path (if h(b(θ, t)) is converted to polar coordinates with angular function φ(t), then take φ(1)-φ(0)). Paths h(b(0°, t)) and h(b(180°, t)) have opposite nonzero angular displacements, and h(b(θ, t)) as θ ranges from 0° to 180° does not change angular displacement unless it goes through (0,0).
Edit: This is the case n=2 of the Borsuk-Ulam theorem.
Edit 2: Cleaned up notation.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Bobo the King wrote:
Why do we care about irrational (or transcendental, or definable...) numbers? I'm a physicist by training and I've never cared if the number I am working with is rational or not
I think there are some uses in physics where the periodicity of events is concerned (such as waveforms/harmonics, or orbital periods). Diophantine approximation and Fourier analysis come to mind. However, I don't know too much about what physicists do.
Warp wrote:
Prove that there are always two points on opposite sides of Earth with the exact same temperature.
There is actually a two-parameter version of the question (e.g. Prove that there exist two points on opposite sides of the Earth with the exact same temperature and elevation.) I'll leave it to others before I give my answer.
By the way, the parameters are continuous on the surface of the sphere/S2.
Where do irrational and transcendental numbers fit?
By definition, irrational means not rational, and transcendental means not algebraic. They don't exactly fit into the hierarchy above. Of course, by the contrapositive, a number that is transcendental is necessarily irrational.
Warp wrote:
Any examples of non-computable numbers?
Constants related to the halting problem, like Chaitin's constant, are not computable numbers. Even if such a constant were to be given its first n digits, no algorithm can generate all of its remaining digits.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
There is actually another notion of definable (or "interesting", if you will) called "arithmetical":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetical_number
Basically "arithmetical" in the article means "definable on Peano arithmetic" and "definable" in its article means... well, I don't know, but I assume "definable on ZFC".
Anyway, all these notions are hardly useful, and are merely the result (and not the cause) of the anthropic principle; basically, the natural result of asking "Which numbers are interesting?"
By the way:
Natural numbers ⊆ Integers ⊆ Rational numbers ⊆ Algebraic numbers ⊆ Computable numbers ⊆ Arithmetical numbers ⊆ Definable numbers
By the time you get to "computable", there isn't much left to consider (99.9999...% of the real numbers we care about are computable).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Warp wrote:
A slightly more semi-serious question: Can you generalize the proof for all rational numbers and all real numbers?
Here's one for rational numbers. (Don't take me seriously.)
Warp's Theorem states that all natural numbers are interesting (see proof). An interesting number divided by another interesting number must surely result in an interesting number! And putting a minus sign on an interesting number also results in an interesting number. Therefore all rational numbers are interesting!
(Or a number n is "interesting" if it gives the unique smallest value of f(n) on some subset of the rational numbers where f is a given bijection between rationals and natural numbers. Warp's argument follows.)
As for real numbers, here's a not-so-valid argument that there exist uninteresting real numbers. An interesting number ought to be a definable number. Conversely, we can accept the notion that a definable number is an interesting number. Yet there are only countably many definable numbers. Therefore there exist uncountably many undefinable, and therefore uninteresting, real numbers.
Or just: "The set of real numbers is too large for anyone to care about all of them." Uncountability wins again.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
I watched this TAS a couple times and enjoyed it. However, there were more than a few rooms where I found myself wishing that there were fewer enemies, just because it was so hard to figure out what Princess Pitch was doing. Oh well, joke difficulty can't be helped.
Patashu wrote:
So, why hasn't this been uploaded to nicovideo yet? Bitrate restrictions can't handle the epicness that is 1000 elves all shooting at once? ;)
Contrary to what the title of this game may indicate and the apparent popularity this game seems to garner in the western world, the game is completely unknown on the Japanese/nicovideo side. So, I wouldn't expect anyone to upload it there (unless that cartman2 guy does anyway :p).
Also, an encode of this TAS needs like 2000kbps just to look decent so yeah. (Nicovideo limit for normal users is 600kbps and 40MB if uploading directly as mp4. Or 100MB for non-mp4 but it will transcode to 600kbps video regardless of original video bitrate. Privileged users dodge all bitrate restrictions and can upload up to 100MB always, but I am not one.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Scepheo wrote:
I've honestly never understood the point or merit of these sort of hypotheses. There's also the one about whether the set containing all sets contains itself (IMO: yes, otherwise it doesn't contain all sets. If this is not allowed, then no such set exists).
It always feel like you are making an assumption (there exist boring numbers) and then saying that assumption must be wrong (this makes them interesting), as such your assumption must be wrong. While I get that this is pretty much what proof by contradiction means, you normally at least deduce something from your assumption.
The point of these types of paradoxes is to point out (in jest) how ill-definedness wreaks havoc in mathematics, not to claim that these statements are somehow inherently useful (which they are obviously not).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
Bobo the King wrote:
Unfortunately, we both overlooked the possibility that x and y might both be odd while z is even.
Technically, that's not possible. If x and y are odd, then x^2 and y^2 are 1 mod 4, so x^2+y^2 is 2 mod 4 and cannot be a square.
It's true that it doesn't affect your proof though. That being said, rhebus's proof above is a simple proof, and one that seems most intuitive.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
oneeighthundred wrote:
This might be the only fighter game where "uses death to save time" would be an appropriate tag.
Technically, the player doesn't die (except maybe the double-KO). Normally, the move would have caused him to die, except that hitting the opponent at the same time somehow allows him to live just barely.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
This TAS is weird. But I like it.
I actually thought it was a random dungeon crawler at first. It reminds me almost of [2315] PSX Ehrgeiz: God Bless the Ring "Quest Mode" by sparky in 03:51.77, except that falling through floors seems to be a glitch and not luck manipulation gone mad.
The final fights are funny as well.
pirohiko's nicovideo encode (this was from a year ago):
Link to video
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
The screenshots that Spikestuff wanted:
Note: They are in 512x240 resolution, since the AVI output mostly uses 512x240 mode.
Edit: Fixed a couple of them.
Edit 2: Fixed off-by-one error on remaining images.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
This is awesome. (Even if the awesomeness lasts only a few days.)
Never would I have dreamed it possible to finish each battle (round) in 2.98s or less in a fighting game, and with almost all of them under 2 seconds. And the way it is done here confirms why Yoshimitsu is the best character ever.
Yes vote.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Skilled player
(1941)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3247
For a moment, I thought this game was good.
Then the game decided to throw in some horrible noises, and make the sea stages really long.
The thing that I most liked about this game was the "gravity" in the sky level, and the ability to bounce.
Other than that, I wasn't entertained. No fault to the author though.
Note: They are in 512x240 resolution, since the AVI output mostly uses 512x240 mode.
Edit: Fixed a couple of them.
Edit 2: Fixed off-by-one error on remaining images.