PDA

View Full Version : OT: A little theory



Celeon999
09-16-2006, 12:19 PM
On search for u-boat vids i just came across this video.


Paintings by Adolf Hitler (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loHEhCf9h34&mode=related&search=)

These are no masterpieces but some of them are really beautiful and a sign of great talent.

The paintings show several places in Bavaria and Linz and Vienna in Austria and i believe there are some from the "Kehlsteinhaus" (HitlerÔ┬┤s famous mountain tea house that was a birthday present to him by the nazi party).

That made me thinking ..:

The Butterfly effect.

What would had happened if the Vienna Arts academy would had accepted Adolf Hitler instead of their refusement ?

Thats only a very simple happening in his life but think of the consequences that might had resulted out of an acceptance by the academy.

If so he wouldnt had been able to travel to Bavaria where he came in contact with anti-semitic movements and nationalists.

Joining the austria-hungarian army by conscript in ww-1 instead of the Reichswehr by volunteering

Its also possible that he wouldnt had survived the war....

Or even when he survived in this alternate universe... He would never had been ordered to infiltrate the Bavarian nationalist party and never became their leading speaker...

A simple "Yes" instead of a "No" by one of the academyÔ┬┤s professors who maybe was just in a bad mood that days would might had saved the world from one of its biggest tragedys.

Imagine the name Adolf Hitler would just be the sign on some pictures in some austrian art galleries.

What do you think ?

Celeon999
09-16-2006, 12:19 PM
On search for u-boat vids i just came across this video.


Paintings by Adolf Hitler (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loHEhCf9h34&mode=related&search=)

These are no masterpieces but some of them are really beautiful and a sign of great talent.

The paintings show several places in Bavaria and Linz and Vienna in Austria and i believe there are some from the "Kehlsteinhaus" (HitlerÔ┬┤s famous mountain tea house that was a birthday present to him by the nazi party).

That made me thinking ..:

The Butterfly effect.

What would had happened if the Vienna Arts academy would had accepted Adolf Hitler instead of their refusement ?

Thats only a very simple happening in his life but think of the consequences that might had resulted out of an acceptance by the academy.

If so he wouldnt had been able to travel to Bavaria where he came in contact with anti-semitic movements and nationalists.

Joining the austria-hungarian army by conscript in ww-1 instead of the Reichswehr by volunteering

Its also possible that he wouldnt had survived the war....

Or even when he survived in this alternate universe... He would never had been ordered to infiltrate the Bavarian nationalist party and never became their leading speaker...

A simple "Yes" instead of a "No" by one of the academyÔ┬┤s professors who maybe was just in a bad mood that days would might had saved the world from one of its biggest tragedys.

Imagine the name Adolf Hitler would just be the sign on some pictures in some austrian art galleries.

What do you think ?

Michiel_88
09-16-2006, 12:34 PM
Ah yes the great 'what if' scenarios. It is tragic indeed that such small simple things could have saved the world from many a horror.

GoldenEagle8
09-16-2006, 12:52 PM
He was a really great artist, If i remember correctly, the acadamy refused him because he wanst to good a drawing people, He really did have some talent though.

Kaiser_W
09-16-2006, 01:19 PM
True, Hitler painted landscapes. People were an afterthought. Though there have been many great painters were people weren't the main focus either.

Realjambo
09-16-2006, 01:35 PM
Blimey yes, the more you think about it, the more mind boggling it gets! - good thought Celeon!

froschman
09-16-2006, 01:48 PM
There were other leaders of the nazi party during 1920-1925, which Hitler had to fight down to gain his F├╝hrer-position. Perhaps the difference would not have been so great with another leader for this extremist-party.

Michiel_88
09-16-2006, 01:52 PM
He painted the church of a city 5km from where I live, called Roeselare. He was here where I live during the first world war. Kinda spooky

Messervy
09-16-2006, 03:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Celeon999:

That made me thinking ..:

The Butterfly effect.

What would had happened if the Vienna Arts academy would had accepted Adolf Hitler instead of their refusement ?

A simple "Yes" instead of a "No" by one of the academyÔ┬┤s professors who maybe was just in a bad mood that days would might had saved the world from one of its biggest tragedys.

Imagine the name Adolf Hitler would just be the sign on some pictures in some austrian art galleries.

What do you think ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don`t want to think...I`ll just tell what I know.

When Hitler wanted to study the architecture in Wien, he was clasified as totaly lacking the interest and sense for architecture.

The man who`s decision we are talking about was a Slovenian architect Maks Fabiani.
He was a very renown architect who amongst other things designed a part of a town where I live. The part is considered to be one of the greatest preserved pieces of sezession architecture in Europe.

Now you know why I don`t want to think..... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bootsmann0815
09-16-2006, 06:39 PM
book tip if you are into alternative scenarions about Hitler: Stephen Fry, "Making History", Arrow Books, 1997. Funny enough if you don't think too deep about it.

Goose_Green
09-16-2006, 08:19 PM
Excellent post Celeon and an interesting thought too!

Only, it's 03:10 as I read this, my head hurts after being on the road for 10 hours - the thought of everything that has happened in the world in the last 70+ plus years that could have been attributed on one single decision is making my head hurt even more http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

It's the old Cause and Consequence scenario again.....my History master at high school kept on reminding me about this....now I know why!!

I need some sleep.....yawn http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sleepzzz.gif

tuddley3
09-16-2006, 08:27 PM
For someone to paint something so beautiful as those , and to be such a monster inside, blows my mind.

Danelov
09-16-2006, 08:48 PM
The personality of this man was very contradictory; from a side he love childrens and animals with a lot of ternure; in parallel he ordered the extermination of millons of humans. The artistic side of Hitler was notorious, and his opinion and "veredict" was the standard to fix by the Regime wich art was "decadent" and forbidden and wich other was "Superb" and accepted. That was aplicable for Architecture, Paints, Statues,monuments, films,music,theater ,Opera,literature,etc,etc,etc.His"executive officer" was the Dr Goebels.He had also gived his personnel touch in the technic, drawings some details of the VW, and also he had a carnet of drawings of future ships for the Kriegsmarine, but too big and out of the possibilities of the German yards.Delicat position for Raeder when he had see the drawings of the F├╝hrer and must give a opinion...

Celeon999
09-17-2006, 05:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's the old Cause and Consequence scenario again </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes exactly. And this gets even more complex when you realize that nobody can really be called responsible for anything.

Like in my example : The slovenian architect Maks Fabiani and his decision may have been one of the critical crossways in the fate of the world but neither he or anybody else could had foreseen the future.

So he carried no responsibility for anything.

Not long ago i had the idea for a short story concerning time travel but im no writer at all and im sure that something like this already exists.

I had the idea for the story of a time traveller who uses a time machine to visit different points in history that he has great interest in.

He travels to Munich in 1921 to be witness of the great political changes and fights between communists and nationalists.

Of course he knows that any alterings in the original historic happenings might cause a gigantic change of the timeline so he takes all precautions not to get involved in anything and behave as inconspicuously as possible.

On the last day before he would travel back he comes out of his local hotel to make a little walk around the streets. After a few meters a man carrying a pile of books runs hasty down the street and directly into him. Both fall down and the man excuses to him and tells him that he is in a great hurry because of an important appointment at the local university.

The time traveller helps the man to pick up his books and wishes him best luck and that he may make it to his appointment in time.

The rest of the day nothing interesting happens and so the time traveller goes back into his own time the next day.

But as he arrives he finds a totally changed world. Nothing is like it used to be when he left. The geographical and politcial worls situations is upmost different from what he used to know and so he makes historical researches to find out what happened.

He finds no reference to the name Adolf Hitler or a second world war. Instead of that he learns about a total different european history.

Assuming that his journey must be responsible for this he desperatly tries to find out what the heck happend.

Logically its hard for him to believe that his presence might have had any influence , especially because of his passivity.

In the end he finds out what happened. The man with the books was on his way to his car that was parked in the next street. In the normal timeline this man reached his car at 8:32 AM and made his way to the university where he arrived at 9:15.

But as he ran into the time traveller the man lost about 1 minute so he reached his car at 8:33. He headed for the university and after 5 minutes drives over a and kills a man who was passing the street at 8:38.

The man was Adolf Hitler.

A simple happening can have no but also gigantic consequences which touch the life of billions of people...

Goose_Green
09-17-2006, 05:25 AM
Interesting comments there Celeon http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

But, I have a further thought - I am fully rested now with a good nights sleep so here goes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Would Japan still have attacked the USA at Pearl Harbour even though the rise of Nazism never occured? Was the Japanese expansion agenda totally independant of the actions of Nazi Germany?

And with the results of an attack on Pearl Harbour would the rest of the world be involved in another war? Remember the colonies of the British, Dutch and French in the Far East. I'm sure with the likes of Japanese attacks on Singapore etc a war would have grown. How long would it have been before the whole of Europe was dragged in?

Oh no what have I started? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Celeon999
09-17-2006, 05:43 AM
Yep thats exactly what i mean. Change only one thing and be ready that this causes a whole chainreaction of changes.

I doubt that Japan would had expanded so aggressively throughout asia without a war in europe which bounds the attention and military resources of the colonial nations like britain there.

It might had happened in a much smaller scale.

Maybe Japan would have had to accept a stalemate situation between their influence on asia and those of the colonial countries and the united states.


The radical decision to fight for greater expansion might never had been issued.

Mittelwaechter
09-17-2006, 05:56 AM
Hey - come on guys - stay at home.
Don't drive and kill a pedestrian to take care of the future...

Messervy
09-17-2006, 07:51 AM
This is called Chaos theory.

The man I personaly blame for Adolf`s misplaced behaviour is a man called Huston Steward Chamberlain (not the British PM) who decisevly and utterly convinced Hitler to start thinking about Teutons and Ubermensch.

Bucketlung
09-17-2006, 10:35 AM
What I don't understand is why Hitler is so often dismissed as an artist. He may not have been at the level of the Dutch masters and maybe would have never been a great painter of people but he sure had a foundation to start as a landscape artist.

I think being accepted to that academy would have completely changed his life and more than a few other people. I have always wondered how the 2nd half of the 20th century would have been different without a WWII in Europe. Would there have been a different war with the Soviet Union? When would nuclear weapons be developed?

Messervy
09-17-2006, 10:48 AM
Heh....if there is a God, nothing would be different, if not......uh my brain hurts.

I`m not able to come up with alternative scenario. All I know is that we would lack much of the gadgets we take for granted nowadays and we would definately not conquer the moon.

Celeon999
09-17-2006, 11:21 AM
Yes there is plenty room for speculation but there are also examples in history where the right men were in the right place at the right time to avoid a catastrophy.


A good example is the Cuba missile crisis.

What might had happened if one of the ultra stalinistic hardliners would had been in power in the soviet union at that time instead of Nikita Khrushchev who knew when it was time to stop ? (The commander of the succesful defense of Stalingrad by the way)

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/191/nikitakhrushchevvj3.jpg


Or if this man would had been in power instead of John F. Kennedy.


General Curtis Le May who urget Kennedy to order the first strike on Cuba even with nuclear weapons.

http://img305.imageshack.us/img305/5191/525pxcurtislemay28usaf29yd6.jpg

John Fitzgerald Kennedy luckily had no interest in his clever suggestions. (My grandmother still has this pic of him in her living room)

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/962/496pxjohnfkennedyuv1.jpg


I think the answer would look like this and we can be grateful that these both kept a cool head in the end.

http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/2853/screenshot1ws5.jpg
http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/7182/pcgamer1tu6.jpg

Danelov
09-17-2006, 08:24 PM
Yes, a very critic moment this one.And that is also true to have the right men in the right place at the right time to avoid a catastrophy.In Korea the risk was Mac Arthur claming for the Atomic bombardement of China;god thanks, he was "fired" in time by Truman.Stalin had also the Atomic bomb in this early 50s.Personally I think we have also the luck to have a Mikhail Gorbachev in the power of Soviet Union to deal with the adventures and extremes of Ronald Reagan in the 80s.The history would be very different with a man like Breznev or others of the "old guard" at the same place.

baggygreen
09-18-2006, 06:17 PM
But when you think about it, scientifically, the existence of absolutely everything is a complete and utter fluke.

It just so happened that the earth was the right distance from the sun to support life, that there is the just right amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, that the meteorite landed to help wipe out the dinosaurs paving the way for mammals, that people evolved into what we are today. On an individual note, its a complete fluke that we are who we are, it is pure luck that our fathers cell merged with our mothers. If it had been another cell, we wouldnt exist!

Everything that we know today, everything that exists is courtesy of a hundred million variables going the right way every single time. If at just one point in our history, something had happened just slightly differently, nothing would ever be the same.

For instance, without that professor saying no, its arguable there would be no war. With no war there would be no cold war, and europe would be at breaking point with its population. with no cold war, there would be nowhere near the level of technology we have today, people never would have landed on the moon (ultimately thanks to v2 rocket) and you know, its likely we wouldnt even have PCs, let alone computers!

I constantly think about how lucky we are now that everything that happened in the past happened, because without it all everything would be so totally and completely different!

Acunnon
09-18-2006, 10:39 PM
First what game is that in Celeons last post. More importantly I think World War Two was inevatable Hitler was simply a catalist, a catalist that was in ample supply.

joeap
09-19-2006, 04:18 AM
Acunnon, that was a film for the 1980s called "Wargames" or something like that about an AI computer that thinks it is playing a game with a hacker but is about to start a real nuclear war.

WarGames (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/)

Fascinating subject. I wonder if Celeon's theory about no one being responsible is not a bit of a cop out? I understand it but still feel that for certain acts there is a moral choice. Not for bumping a guy carrying books.



As to the clip, nice and all, but the comments on YouTube are usually just sh** especially on some of the WWII clips. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif (Not Celeon's or some others).

Celeon999
09-19-2006, 09:06 AM
The pics are from a new game called "Defcon" that will be released via Steam on 29.september but yes it is based on the movie "wargames" like joeap said.

A very good movie by the way. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

The message of the movie and game is the same : You cant win a nuclear war.

The super computer in the movie was build to simulate ww-3 over and over again to find the best possible way to fight it and it is learning by doing that.

Of course a catastrophy begins as the computer called "WOPR" that controls all nuclear missiles of the USA tries to play the game in reality because it doesnt know the difference between game and reality

In the end of the movie it learns something very important out of thousands of simulations and comes to the conclusion that a global nuclear war is similar to the game TIC TAC TOE in which no player can win :

"A strange game"

"The only winning move is not to play at all."

"What about a nice game of chess ?" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


@ Joeap

Yes of course someone who really can foresee what his actions will result in has responsibilty.

But thats often not possible.

Realjambo
09-19-2006, 09:26 AM
I read a preview of that Defcon game, looks interesting. It's by the guy wwho wrote Darwinia which did pretty well. I'll be looking forward to a demo version of DEFCON.

Celeon999
09-20-2006, 11:58 AM
But somehow "Defcon" seems to be a strange game.

Its just about ordering massive nuclear strikes by trying to keep own losses as small as possible.


Somehow a very dull game idea.


There was a game called "Theatre Europe" back in the old Commodore 64 times.

It was based on the same idea but with a much more complex strategic background.

You were commanding NATO or Warsaw Pact armies in a fictive third world war and your goal was to end the war the best possible way. Of course ending the war in a massive thermonuclear war = loosing the game completely.


You had to act very careful. Fight the enemy but not bring him under too much pressure so that he looses it and pushes the trigger.

One or maybe even two nuclear strikes on enemy armies were (maybe sometimes) acceptable and caused just a limited nuclear or chemical response but at least your third attack led to a massive nuclear strike with all that your enemy had in stock.

Destroying a city led logically to an immidate counterstrike on one of your own and brings your enemy on edge.


So your goal was to defeat your enemy so far that a cease fire becomes possible.

The hardest way to win the game was logically ending it without any nuclear or chemical weapon beeing used , as few civilian and military losses as possible.

Warsaw Pact was in offense : Its goal was conquer Europe and destroy NATO. Dont be too aggressive or NATO sees no other option but using nukes to save itself !

Nato was in defense : Hold the frontline that goes through germany and not more ! If you go for moscow .... the world ends in a bright flash !

Short : You have the 3rd world war at your hands so make the best out of it and try not to end mankinds existence !

Realjambo
09-20-2006, 12:46 PM
Anyone ever play Fleet Command? I guess the appeal of Defcon is, for me, in part that the interfaces look similar and I assume the gameplay will be too.

tuddley3
09-20-2006, 01:22 PM
I had a game called DEFCON 5 on my C-64

Celeon999
09-22-2006, 11:21 AM
We had colored pictures from Hitler now we have color pictures of him http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif


Hitler in color (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J3-kdk-r80&mode=related&search=)

Luckily its not Goebbels in color or the "O" would get these horrible nightmares again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VikingGrandad
09-26-2006, 04:49 AM
Just spotted this in the news:

Adolf Hitler paintings up for auction today (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2375160,00.html)

Celeon999
09-26-2006, 08:29 AM
Yep, saw it in the news two days ago.

Acunnon
09-28-2006, 11:24 PM
slightly off topic to the thread but Fileshack (http://www.fileshack.com/browse.x?cat=3727) has four DEFCON game play videos.

Kaleun1961
09-29-2006, 10:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by baggygreen:
But when you think about it, scientifically, the existence of absolutely everything is a complete and utter fluke.

It just so happened that the earth was the right distance from the sun to support life, that there is the just right amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, that the meteorite landed to help wipe out the dinosaurs paving the way for mammals, that people evolved into what we are today. On an individual note, its a complete fluke that we are who we are, it is pure luck that our fathers cell merged with our mothers. If it had been another cell, we wouldnt exist!

Everything that we know today, everything that exists is courtesy of a hundred million variables going the right way every single time. If at just one point in our history, something had happened just slightly differently, nothing would ever be the same.

For instance, without that professor saying no, its arguable there would be no war. With no war there would be no cold war, and europe would be at breaking point with its population. with no cold war, there would be nowhere near the level of technology we have today, people never would have landed on the moon (ultimately thanks to v2 rocket) and you know, its likely we wouldnt even have PCs, let alone computers!

I constantly think about how lucky we are now that everything that happened in the past happened, because without it all everything would be so totally and completely different! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But then there are others, like myself for instance, who do not attribute the existence of the universe and ourselves to random chance but to intentional creation. I'm not trying to start a debate of evolution vs. creation, for nothing would be decided one way or the other. I've always felt that it takes more faith to believe in random chance as the explanation for all things than a creation by God.

Messervy
09-29-2006, 01:19 PM
@Kaleun 1961

Are you fammiliar with Mark Steel`s series?

mnordby
09-30-2006, 11:00 PM
Getting back to Hitler for a moment, there's a relevant part in "Rise and Fall..." in which Shirer recounts Hitler's love attachment to his much-younger cousin, Geli Rabaul. He was 40; she was 20 something, and wanted nothing to do with Adolph. He took it hard. Shirer speculates if this was the break that got Hitler on the road to monstrousness, and what effect a reciprocal relationship might have had. He was, after all, already involved in politics by the time this went down.

I think the answer is, all these things contributed, and if they had not occurred, things would have been different in some fashion.

As to Nikita, I knew he was an NKDV commander at Stalingrad, but I wasn't aware he was the top guy militarily. It's portrayed that way in "Enemy at the Gates", but was it really true?

baggygreen
10-01-2006, 01:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaleun1961:


But then there are others, like myself for instance, who do not attribute the existence of the universe and ourselves to random chance but to intentional creation. I'm not trying to start a debate of evolution vs. creation, for nothing would be decided one way or the other. I've always felt that it takes more faith to believe in random chance as the explanation for all things than a creation by God. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is very true, and youre right of course - with the way that things worked out there does indeed seem to be some sort of design at work. I also know what you mean about the whole debate thing being impossible to get a certain answer for - until we die. i do think that the truth is an amalgamation somewhere \between the theologians and the scientists, im just not sure where exactly.

Messervy - who is mark steele?

spellir_74
10-01-2006, 08:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by baggygreen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaleun1961:


But then there are others, like myself for instance, who do not attribute the existence of the universe and ourselves to random chance but to intentional creation. I'm not trying to start a debate of evolution vs. creation, for nothing would be decided one way or the other. I've always felt that it takes more faith to believe in random chance as the explanation for all things than a creation by God. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is very true, and youre right of course - with the way that things worked out <span class="ev_code_RED">there does indeed seem to be some sort of design at work. </span> I also know what you mean about the whole debate thing being impossible to get a certain answer for - until we die. i do think that the truth is an amalgamation somewhere \between the theologians and the scientists, im just not sure where exactly.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You mean the design to torture people --and everything else, times the entire universe for billions of years-- to red-in-tooth-and-claw death in the name of some greater good that hasn't been revealed yet because we haven't submitted properly enough yet to the torture-us-all plan?

mnordby
10-01-2006, 08:50 AM
"But then there are others, like myself for instance, who do not attribute the existence of the universe and ourselves to random chance but to intentional creation."

It isn't just a choice between chance and creation. Just because God didn't invent it doesn't mean it's random. As far as anyone can tell, reality behaves in a lawful and predictable fashion (otherwise the torpedo you launched at a tanker in the Caribbean would wind up slamming through a window of a diner in Cleveland, or the child you concieved could exit the womb as a bawling calf). The rub comes when we ask, "...so what about just BEFORE the big bang, or whatever. What caused that?" For that one, we have to either leave the realm of knowledge and enter the realm of belief, or simply say we don't know (and probably never will due to lack of data).

baggygreen
10-01-2006, 08:49 PM
spellir - what the???i presume you mean if there is any sort of over-arching design how can bad things happen?

from the religious standpoint, thats cos each individual can shoose their actions. from the scientific one, thats cos there are anomalies in the way people act.

regardless, whilst all that kind of thing is nasty and noone will deny it, without such events you wouldnt have the things we have today - without ww2, for example, wed probably still be driving studebakers, computers would still probably be taking up entire office blocks.... etc.