a wooden workmate

May 12, 2008

Glob Pinboard

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 2:27 pm

Advertisements

May 5, 2008

Boxes

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 11:42 am

Various Bombs and Bombs with Balloons

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 11:41 am

Eyeballs, Flames, Stick Men

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 11:11 am

May 1, 2008

Rain!

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 6:53 pm

I just had a thought that it could be really nice to have rain, perhaps small random showers, maybe in small areas? that move?

This could affect things- put fires out, get things soaked through (the poor little dresses!), make puddles etc.  Could be really nice for sound effects too.

I don’t think it should have an obvious trigger, but perhaps itself could trigger a new task?

April 30, 2008

Heads

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 8:17 pm

Second Meeting- Graph Paper Drawings

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 8:12 pm

Heads

Filed under: Uncategorized — dinomo @ 3:43 pm

The prospect of giant heads with opening mouths reminds me of a stupid little mobile game I made ages ago after waking up in the middle of the night with it in my head, and not being able to go back to sleep until I drew the graphics for it.

In this game, there are a load of heads. Each one is numbered. Their eyes and mouths can open and close independantly of one another. By pressing keys on the keypad, you can make their eyes and mouths open and close. But it’s a bit scrambled up – so when you press to open one head’s mouth, another’s eyes might shut. The idea is to get all of the mouths and eyes closed.
Here’s an animated gif of the graphics.

April 22, 2008

Strangeness

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 5:55 pm

I just googled ‘strangeness’ (after my previous post- Tiny Acts of Poignant Strangeness) and came up with this:

Strangeness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In particle physics, strangeness, denoted as S, is a property of particles, expressed as a quantum number for describing decay of particles in strong and electro-magnetic reactions, which occur in a short period of time. The strangeness of a particle is defined as:

S = N_{\overline{s}} - N_s

where N_{\overline{s}} represents the number of strange anti-quarks ({\overline{s}}) and N_s \ represents the number of strange quarks.

The derivation of the phrase “strange” or “strangeness” precedes the discovery of the quark, and was adopted after its discovery in order to preserve the continuity of the phrase; strangeness of anti-particles being referred to as +1, and particles as -1 as per the original definition. For all the quark flavor quantum numbers (strangeness, charm, topness and bottomness) the convention is that the flavor charge and the electric charge of a quark have the same sign. With this, any flavor carried by a charged meson has the same sign as its charge.

[edit] Strangeness conservation

Strangeness was introduced, by Murray Gell-Mann and Kazuhiko Nishijima, originally to explain the fact that certain particles, such as the kaons or certain hyperons were created easily in particle collisions, yet decayed much more slowly than expected for their large masses and large production cross sections. Noting that collisions seemed to always produce pairs of these particles, it was postulated that a new conserved quality, dubbed “strangeness”, was preserved during their creation, but not conserved in their decay.

In our modern understanding, strangeness is conserved during the strong and the electromagnetic interactions, but not during the weak interactions. Consequently the lightest particles containing a strange quark cannot decay by the strong interaction, and must instead decay via the much slower weak interaction. In most cases these decays change the value of the strangeness by one unit. However, this doesn’t necessarily hold in second-order, weak reactions, where there are mixes of K0 and K0 mesons.

[edit]

There is something interesting about it? Particularly the relation to physics, and the funny use of the terms: strangeness, charm, topness and bottomness

But I may be flying off on weird tangents.

Tiny Acts of Poignant Strangeness

Filed under: Uncategorized — Daniel Baker @ 5:50 pm

I am leaning towards the idea of small tasks, such as the dresses pulling a ‘bomb’ into a hole, which then generates a transformation, (lots of streamers fly out of it….as they do in the pictures) which leads to another task- the looners have to pull down their balloons before they get cut? or the streamers have to be directed to cut the strings?….leading to another small, and seemingly random task, in which the stick men are trying to build something etc.

Or maybe some ‘tasks’ could be concurrent- i.e. in different areas of the ‘page’, and you can move from one to another?

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.