I believe the beams and cannon are bound to f5 and f6 by default but I could be off by a key or two.From post: 156164, Topic: tid=10440, author=zex wrote:Hi!
While I'm afraid to answer your question directly, I'd like to offer a tip.
If you bind your beam and particle weapons to different keys, and use beam to take out shields and cannon for hull, you'll find it much easier to manage energy.
Nothing is hard to locate.
Actually according to quantum mechanics you can - it's called vacuum energy and is demonstrated by an experiment that shows the Casimir Effect.From post: 156177, Topic: tid=10440, author=-splosives- wrote:Funny thing is that you can't really generate energy out of nothing.
Maxwell was correct the first time. The Ether is real. :P
From post: 156270, Topic: tid=10440, author=Marvin wrote:
Just got a bit shorter, my friend. Experimental (as opposed to theoretical) evidence for vacuum energy:From post: 156274, Topic: tid=10440, author=Maarschalk wrote:Hi UnaManu, welcome to the game and forum!.....Hope to see you out there some time!.....
The debate where Energy comes from can be a relatively long and tedious argument. If Energy seems to come out of nowhere we can not say it comes out of nothing.
We just do not know! It just can come out of another dimension from something in that other dimension!.....Science alone will never be able to explain everything!.....
Actually, energy can come from nothing (a vacuum) in the form of paired particles as long as they recombine and within a very very short period of time. It's when you can capture one of the particles with a BH that allows the other to escape. The captured particle pairs with a particle of matter inside the BH and they pair disappear, reducing the BH's energy (=mass) and so it appears from the outside that the BH has emitted a particle and lost mass.From post: 156337, Topic: tid=10440, author=-splosives- wrote:Vacuum is not nothing. There's a lack of mass, but there's still what we call "spacetime" and "dark matter" and all that jazz.
What I mean is that the word "energy generator" should be replaced by "energy converter" regardless of where the energy comes from.
I told you it is going to be a long tedious argument, even the articles you reffered to about the Casmir Effect are arguably. Like some are arguing that this effect is nothing more then the Van Der Waals forces!From post: 156341, Topic: tid=10440, author=DaveK wrote:Actually, energy can come from nothing (a vacuum) in the form of paired particles as long as they recombine and within a very very short period of time. It's when you can capture one of the particles with a BH that allows the other to escape. The captured particle pairs with a particle of matter inside the BH and they pair disappear, reducing the BH's energy (=mass) and so it appears from the outside that the BH has emitted a particle and lost mass.From post: 156337, Topic: tid=10440, author=-splosives- wrote:Vacuum is not nothing. There's a lack of mass, but there's still what we call "spacetime" and "dark matter" and all that jazz.
What I mean is that the word "energy generator" should be replaced by "energy converter" regardless of where the energy comes from.
Stephen Hawkin's idea - not mine
Whatever it is, if it turns out that it really is, Dark Matter isn't vacuum and Dark Energy is a force screwing with gravity - it's not energy. A vacuum is full of quantum fluctuations on a scale that makes sub atomic particles look enoooormooous. It's from these fluctuations that pairs of particles can appear (and disappear), so that energy conservation isn't broken.
There's a tentative new suggestion that extensions to the theory can explain where the singularity for the Big Bang came from - side tracking the question of "if the universe started with a big bang, where did that come from?"
I just love this stuff (though as the man said - "if you think you understand this, you weren't listening properly!" and my frustration with having to die is that I won't find out how it all ends!! I'd love to travel through a jump gate!
:P From post: 156337, Topic: tid=10440, author=-splosives- wrote:What I mean is that the word "energy generator" should be replaced by "energy converter" regardless of where the energy comes from.
Yeah, I think Dave passed over that part. But, if you're going to get persnickety about it, "generator" is a word but "energy generator" is a phrase.