If I wrote a story, would ANY of you read it?

Discussion in 'The Spam Zone' started by Cin, Mar 3, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cin Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    :uoıʇɐɔo1
    241
    Seriosuly? I mean come on there's what, 3000 members on this forum? Yet every time I post a good story that I wrote, like 5 people respond.

    Wth? Come on people, use the creativity corner more often, I'm starting to think you're all just a bunch of culturless idiots.
     
  2. I look in the cc alot. And yeah I do read some of you're stuff.
     
  3. Zexion of the Twilight The conflicts within my priorities....

    28
    We all are in the spamzone. Sorry, we are "just a bunch of culturless idiots."
     
  4. Darkandroid Gets it Together

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    England
    240
    I'm not a huge fan of reading fan fics, hence why I tend not to reply, but I guess I could find time to read yours.
     
  5. C This silence is mine

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Female
    817
    I don't read it if it's not about me or someone i know
     
  6. Soushirei 運命の欠片

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    80
    There are only about 1,000+ active members out of the 4,000+, but I can say that I understand where you're coming from.

    I assume that there are more people reading the fic, but very few actually take the time to post a response on the thread. This of course may not mean they're not enjoying the fic, but some may just like to read and not give feedback. It happens all the time on fanfiction.net.

    However, it's also a possibility that some may start reading the fic, and find out that they're not all that interested in reading more. Of course, I seriously doubt that would be the case here since there are far too many members for there to be *no one* appreciating your writing, Cin. That being said, it's also important to understand that what you may find good may not be the cup of tea for someone else.

    My very own fanfiction that I've been posting up in Creativity Corner, despite having 240 hits, I believe--only Shikamarus Shadow, draik88, Storrini, Darky, Gharanth and Axel have bothered to post anything at all about it. Moreso, draik88, Storrini and Darky are the only three people who have posted more than once on my story. That makes three readers who have given continual feedback and comments on my story out of the 240 hits the story has gotten. Or you could say only 3 out of the 1,000+ active members seem to have been loyal to my story and reading it.

    In the end, I suppose I don't mind, although it would be nice to see who's enjoying it and who's.. not, haha. I wouldn't go so far as to say the forum is full of culturless idiots, just maybe fanfiction isn't the primary basis of why they come to the forum. I'll gladly read your work, Cin, if you want to add one more person to that list of five that you say tend to read yours. And if you need me to comment on it as well, I will.
     
  7. Cin Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    :uoıʇɐɔo1
    241
    Hmmm...glad I have your support Sousherei...XD
     
  8. delux Traverse Town Homebody

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    3
    101
    Sure Cin. I'd personally read them. The reason I havent read any of your others is because, frankly I didnt even know we had a creativity section. Ok, shoot me now. *blindsfold self*
     
  9. Cin Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    :uoıʇɐɔo1
    241
    Queit down Delux, I'm not scheduled to kill you until after you sleep with my wife. But seeing as he's not even part if the site anymore, that may be a while.
     
  10. delux Traverse Town Homebody

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    3
    101
    Oh, um I forgot to tell you, I uh *dont say i did your wife, dont say i did your wife, i uh did your son?* Oh damn, *runs*
     
  11. COULD A CURTLESS IDIOT SAY THIS!?!?! *tear*

    In particle physics, antimatter extends the concept of the antiparticle to matter, wherein if a particle and its antiparticle come into contact with each other, the two annihilate or cause the equivalent to a nuclear explosion, similar to nuclear fission —that is, they may both be converted into other particles with equal energy in accordance with Einstein's equation E = mc2. This gives rise to high-energy photons (gamma rays) or other particle–antiparticle pairs. The resulting particles are endowed with an amount of kinetic energy equal to the difference between the rest mass of the products of the annihilation and the rest mass of the original particle-antiparticle pair, which is often quite large.
    Antimatter is not found naturally on Earth, except very briefly and in ephemerally small quantities (as the result of radioactive decay or cosmic rays). This is because antimatter which comes to exist on Earth outside the confines of a suitably equipped physics laboratory would inevitably come into contact with the ordinary matter that Earth is made of, and be annihilated. Antiparticles and some stable antimatter (such as antihydrogen) can be made in minuscule amounts, but not in enough quantity to do more than test a few of its theoretical properties.
    There is considerable speculation both in science and science fiction as to why the observable universe is apparently almost entirely matter, whether other places are almost entirely antimatter instead, and what might be possible if antimatter could be harnessed, but at this time the apparent asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the great unsolved problems in physics. Possible processes by which it came about are explored in more detail under baryogenesis.

    History
    In December 1927 Paul Dirac developed a relativistic equation for the electron, now known as the Dirac equation. Curiously, the equation was found to have negative-energy solutions in addition to the normal positive ones. This presented a problem, as electrons tend toward the lowest possible energy level; energies of negative infinity are nonsensical. As a way of getting around this, Dirac proposed that the vacuum is filled with a "sea" of negative-energy electrons, the Dirac sea. Any real electrons would therefore have to sit on top of the sea, having positive energy.
    Thinking further, Dirac found that a "hole" in the sea would have a positive charge. At first he thought that this was the proton, but Hermann Weyl pointed out the hole should have the same mass as the electron. The existence of this particle, the positron, was confirmed experimentally in 1932 by Carl D. Anderson. During this period, antimatter was sometimes also known as "contraterrene matter".
    Today's Standard Model shows that every particle has an antiparticle, for which each additive quantum number has the negative of the value it has for the normal matter particle. The sign reversal applies only to quantum numbers (properties) which are additive, such as charge, but not to mass, for example. The positron has the opposite charge but the same mass as the electron. For particles whose additive quantum numbers are all zero, the particle may be its own antiparticle; such particles include the photon and the neutral pion.

    [edit] Artificial production

    The artificial production of atoms of antimatter (specifically antihydrogen) first became a reality in the early 1990s. An atom of antihydrogen is composed of a negatively-charged antiproton being orbited by a positively-charged positron. Stanley Brodsky, Ivan Schmidt and Charles Munger at SLAC, realized that an antiproton, traveling at relativistic speeds and passing close to the nucleus of an atom, would have the potential to force the creation of an electron-positron pair. It was postulated that under this scenario the antiproton would have a small chance of pairing with the positron (ejecting the electron) to form an antihydrogen atom.
    In 1995 CERN announced that it had successfully created nine antihydrogen atoms by implementing the SLAC/Fermilab concept during the PS210 experiment. The experiment was performed using the Low Energy Antiproton Ring (LEAR), and was led by Walter Oelert and Mario Macri. Fermilab soon confirmed the CERN findings by producing approximately 100 antihydrogen atoms at their facilities.
    The antihydrogen atoms created during PS210, and subsequent experiments (at both CERN and Fermilab) were extremely energetic ("hot") and were not well suited to study. To resolve this hurdle, and to gain a better understanding of antihydrogen, two collaborations were formed in the late 1990s — ATHENA and ATRAP. The primary goal of these collaborations is the creation of less energetic ("cold") antihydrogen, better suited to study.
    In 1999 CERN activated the Antiproton Decelerator, a device capable of decelerating antiprotons from 3.5 GeV to 5.3 MeV — still too "hot" to produce study-effective antihydrogen, but a huge leap forward. In late 2002 the ATHENA project announced that they had created the world's first "cold" antihydrogen. The antiprotons used in the experiment were cooled sufficiently by decelerating them (using the Antiproton Decelerator), passing them through a thin sheet of foil, and finally capturing them in a Penning trap. The antiprotons also underwent stochastic cooling at several stages during the process.
    The ATHENA team's antiproton cooling process is effective, but highly inefficient. Approximately 25 million antiprotons leave the Antiproton Decelerator; roughly 10 thousand make it to the Penning trap. In early 2004 ATHENA researchers released data on a new method of creating low-energy antihydrogen. The technique involves slowing antiprotons using the Antiproton Decelerator, and injecting them into a Penning trap (specifically a Penning-Malmberg trap). Once trapped the antiprotons are mixed with electrons that have been cooled to an energy potential significantly less than the antiprotons; the resulting Coulomb collisions cool the antiprotons while warming the electrons until the particles reach an equilibrium of approximately 4 K.
    While the antiprotons are being cooled in the first trap, a small cloud of positron plasma is injected into a second trap (the mixing trap). Exciting the resonance of the mixing trap’s confinement fields can control the temperature of the positron plasma; but the procedure is more effective when the plasma is in thermal equilibrium with the trap’s environment. The positron plasma cloud is generated in a positron accumulator prior to injection; the source of the positrons is usually radioactive sodium.
    Once the antiprotons are sufficiently cooled, the antiproton-electron mixture is transferred into the mixing trap (containing the positrons). The electrons are subsequently removed by a series of fast pulses in the mixing trap's electrical field. When the antiprotons reach the positron plasma further Coulomb collisions occur, resulting in further cooling of the antiprotons. When the positrons and antiprotons approach thermal equilibrium antihydrogen atoms begin to form. Being electrically neutral the antihydrogen atoms are not affected by the trap and can leave the confinement fields.
    Using this method ATHENA researchers predict they will be able to create up to 100 antihydrogen atoms per operational second. ATHENA and ATRAP are now seeking to further cool the antihydrogen atoms by subjecting them to an inhomogeneous field. While antihydrogen atoms are electrically neutral, their spin produces magnetic moments. These magnetic moments vary depending on the spin direction of the atom, and can be deflected by inhomogeneous fields regardless of electrical charge.
    The biggest limiting factor in the production of antimatter is the availability of antiprotons. Recent data released by CERN states that when fully operational their facilities are capable of producing 107 antiprotons per second. Assuming an optimal conversion of antiprotons to antihydrogen, it would take two billion years to produce 1 gram of antihydrogen. Another limiting factor to antimatter production is storage. As stated above there is no known way to effectively store antihydrogen. The ATHENA project has managed to keep antihydrogen atoms from annihilation for tens of seconds — just enough time to briefly study their behaviour.
    According to an article on the website of the CERN laboratories, which produces antimatter on a regular basis, "If we could assemble all the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes." [1]

    [edit] Naturally occurring production

    Antiparticles are created everywhere in the universe where high-energy particle collisions take place. High-energy cosmic rays impacting Earth's atmosphere (or any other matter in the solar system) produce minute quantities of antimatter in the resulting particle jets, which is immediately annihilated by contact with nearby matter. It may similarly be produced in regions like the center of the Milky Way Galaxy and other galaxies, where very energetic celestial events occur (principally the interaction of relativistic jets with the interstellar medium). The presence of the resulting antimatter is detected by the gamma rays produced when it annihilates with nearby matter.
    Antiparticles are also produced in any environment with a sufficiently high temperature (mean particle energy greater than the pair production threshold). During the period of baryogenesis, when the universe was extremely hot and dense, matter and antimatter were continually produced and annihilated. The presence of remaining matter, and absence of detection of remaining antimatter[1], is attributed to violation of the CP-symmetry relating matter and antimatter. The exact mechanism of this violation during baryogenesis remains a mystery.
    Positrons are also produced from the radioactive decay of nucleides such as carbon-11, nitrogen-13, oxygen-15, fluorine-18, and iodine-121

    [edit] Notation

    One way to denote an antiparticle is by adding a bar (or macron) over the particle's symbol. For example, the proton and antiproton are denoted as [​IMG] and [​IMG], respectively. The same rule applies if you were to address a particle by its constituent components. A proton is made up of [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG] quarks, so an antiproton must therefore be formed from [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG] antiquarks. Another convention is to distinguish particles by their electric charge. Thus, the electron and positron are denoted simply as e− and e+.

    [edit] Uses


    [edit] Medical

    Antimatter-matter reactions have practical applications in medical imaging, such as positron emission tomography (PET). In positive beta decay, a nuclide loses surplus positive charge by emitting a positron (in the same event, a proton becomes a neutron, and neutrinos are also given off). Nuclides with surplus positive charge are easily made in a cyclotron and are widely generated for medical use.

    [edit] Fuel

    In antimatter-matter collisions resulting in photon emission, the entire rest mass of the particles is converted to kinetic energy. The energy per unit mass is about 10 orders of magnitude greater than chemical energy, and about 2 orders of magnitude greater than nuclear energy that can be liberated today using nuclear fission or fusion. The reaction of 1 kg of antimatter with 1 kg of matter would produce 1.8×1017 J (180 petajoules) of energy (by the equation E=mc²). This is about 134 times as much energy as is obtained by nuclear fusion of the same mass of hydrogen (fusion of 1H to 4He produces about 7 MeV per nucleon, or 1.3×1015 J for 2 kg of hydrogen). This amount of energy would be released by burning 5.6 billion liters (1.5 billion US gallons) of gasoline (the combustion of one liter of gasoline in oxygen produces 3.2×107 J), or by detonating 43 million tonnes of TNT (at 4.2×106 J/kg).
    Not all of that energy can be utilized by any realistic technology, because as much as 50% of energy produced in reactions between nucleons and antinucleons is carried away by neutrinos, so, for all intents and purposes, it can be considered lost.[2]
    The scarcity of antimatter means that it is not readily available to be used as fuel, although it could be used in antimatter catalyzed nuclear pulse propulsion. Generating a single antiproton is immensely difficult and requires particle accelerators and vast amounts of energy—millions of times more than is released after it is annihilated with ordinary matter, due to inefficiencies in the process. Known methods of producing antimatter from energy also produce an equal amount of normal matter, so the theoretical limit is that half of the input energy is converted to antimatter. Counterbalancing this, when antimatter annihilates with ordinary matter, energy equal to twice the mass of the antimatter is liberated—so energy storage in the form of antimatter could (in theory) be 100% efficient. Antimatter production is currently very limited, but has been growing at a nearly geometric rate since the discovery of the first antiproton in 1955.[3] The current antimatter production rate is between 1 and 10 nanograms per year, and this is expected to increase to between 3 and 30 nanograms per year by 2015 or 2020 with new superconducting linear accelerator facilities at CERN and Fermilab. Some researchers claim that with current technology, it is possible to obtain antimatter for US$25 million per gram by optimizing the collision and collection parameters (given current electricity generation costs). Antimatter production costs, in mass production, are almost linearly tied in with electricity costs, so economical pure-antimatter thrust applications are unlikely to come online without the advent of such technologies as deuterium-tritium fusion power (assuming that such a power source actually would prove to be cheap). Many experts, however, dispute these claims as being far too optimistic by many orders of magnitude. They point out that in 2004; the annual production of antiprotons at CERN was several picograms at a cost of $20 million. This means to produce 1 gram of antimatter, CERN would need to spend 100 quadrillion dollars and run the antimatter factory for 100 billion years. Storage is another problem, as antiprotons are negatively charged and repel against each other, so that they cannot be concentrated in a small volume. Plasma oscillations in the charged cloud of antiprotons can cause instabilities that drive antiprotons out of the storage trap. For these reasons, to date only a few million antiprotons have been stored simultaneously in a magnetic trap, which corresponds to much less than a femtogram. Antihydrogen atoms or molecules are neutral so in principle they do not suffer the plasma problems of antiprotons described above. But cold antihydrogen is far more difficult to produce than antiprotons, and so far not a single antihydrogen atom has been trapped in a magnetic field.
    Several NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts-funded studies are exploring whether the antimatter that occurs naturally in the Van Allen belts of Earth, and ultimately, the belts of gas giants like Jupiter, might be able to be collected with magnetic scoops, at hopefully a lower cost per gram.[4]
    Since the energy density is vastly higher than these other forms, the thrust to weight equation used in antimatter rocketry and spacecraft would be very different. In fact, the energy in a few grams of antimatter is enough to transport an unmanned spacecraft to Mars in about a month—the Mars Global Surveyor took eleven months to reach Mars. It is hoped that antimatter could be used as fuel for interplanetary travel or possibly interstellar travel, but it is also feared that if humanity ever gets the capabilities to do so, there could be the construction of antimatter weapons.

    [edit] Antiuniverse

    Dirac himself was the first to consider the existence of antimatter in an astronomical scale. But it was only after the confirmation of his theory, with the discovery of the positron, antiproton and antineutron that real speculation began on the possible existence of an antiuniverse. In the following years, motivated by basic symmetry principles, it was believed that the universe must consist of both matter and antimatter in equal amounts. If, however, there were an isolated system of antimatter in the universe, free from interaction with ordinary matter, no earthbound observation could distinguish its true content, as photons (being their own antiparticle) are the same whether they originate from a “universe” or an “antiuniverse”. Hannes Alfvén proposed a variant of this idea when he described a universe dominated by ambiplasma.
    But assuming large zones of antimatter exist, there must be some boundary where antimatter atoms from the antimatter galaxies or stars will come into contact with normal atoms. In those regions a powerful flux of gamma rays would be produced. This has never been observed despite deployment of very sensitive instruments in space to detect them.
    It is now thought that symmetry was broken in the early universe during a period of baryogenesis, when matter-antimatter symmetry was violated. Standard Big Bang cosmology tells us that the universe initially contained equal amounts of matter and antimatter: however particles and antiparticles evolved slightly differently. It was found that a particular heavy unstable particle, which is its own antiparticle, decays slightly more often to positrons (e+) than to electrons (e−). How this accounts for the preponderance of matter over antimatter has not been completely explained. The Standard Model of particle physics does have a way of accommodating a difference between the evolution of matter and antimatter, but it falls short of explaining the net excess of matter in the universe by about 10 orders of magnitude.
    After Dirac, science fiction writers produced myriad visions of antiworlds, antistars and antiuniverses, all made of antimatter, and it is still a common plot device; however, suppositions of the existence of a coeval, antimatter duplicate of this universe are not taken seriously in modern cosmology.


    question!

    Did I remember to put about the annihalation and antideproccessors?

    Also for related information please click on the links for directory to wikipedia files.
     
  12. Cin Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    :uoıʇɐɔo1
    241
    Dude...you copied that directly from wiki...XD

    And I said "culterless idiots" not curtless idiots...:p
     
  13. reah you're right I did. Ah well. I could'nt be bothered to write about it again after writing about it in 'intelligent discussion'.
     
  14. Mish smiley day!

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    gal
    Location:
    Nuke York.
    983
    Actually, you said 'culturless idiots'. :3

    It doesn't matter, though, since both spellings are wrong.

    'CULTURELESS'!

    WE'RE 'CULTURELESS' IDIOTS! GET IT RIGHT. D<

    :]
     
  15. Axel Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Location:
    Partying, making tags and Staring at the Sun.
    33
    Lmao pwned.

    Anyways, I try sometimes reading fan fics but normally don't have enough time to finish so I don't post. I was gonna read totally your joint Untitled thing with Roxas but well...ya no.
    Anyways I could try looking around more in the CC area, sicne I'm mostly in A&G (no surprises there) Anything Else ...
    So yes.



    And about this...well..there is no way close to 1000 active members. There are possibly 100+ posting active members. That's it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.