On my laptop I'm currently using the fglrx driver for my 200M chipset. One thing that bothers me is since I stopped using the "ati" driver (needed acceleration for games), when a game drops the resolution (ex: wine starcraft.exe - starcraft uses 640x480) it does not scale the image. I have the image scaling enabled in the bios (my console proves that much), have it working just fine in Windows 2K/XP/Vista, but I can't seem to get it to work in X11. I've searched and seen plenty of people want to know how to disable this, but I'm asking how to enable. Any thoughts?

http://www.x.org/archive/X11R6.8.2/doc/ not necessarily what you're looking for, but see if you can get anything out of it. Do you mean, by "not scaling", that the resolution is set to 640x480 and at the same time the image size is a lot smaller than your screen size (i.e. the image is not full-screen)? I've never even heard about that kind of stuff..well, at the moment I don't have a 3d-capable graphics card, so..

Just out of curiosity: if universe was infinite, and you ignored objects, how could you hit a wall (wall being an object)? And how could you end up back where you started, given that time flows all the time, so..shortly said, in a 2- or 3-dimensional world you could say you're "back where I started", but space isn't that easy piece; when time is taken in, or some other dimensions, you're never where you left from, even if you take a step forward and one backward. Another idea is that if space curvs, but so that you couldn't see it with limited human eyes, you would walk straight forward and slowly the space curved so you could end up walking a spirale or a circle without actually knowing it, thinking you walk forward. Also nothing, at the moment, is saying space could not be infinite; what's the problem with setting off and just keeping going on forever without ending up anywhere?

It's just the lack of imagination that creates limits

[Quote b0uncer]Just out of curiosity: if universe was infinite, and you ignored objects, how could you hit a wall (wall being an object)? And how could you end up back where you started, given that time flows all the time, so..shortly said, in a 2- or 3-dimensional world you could say you're "back where I started", but space isn't that easy piece; when time is taken in, or some other dimensions, you're never where you left from, even if you take a step forward and one backward. Another idea is that if space curves, but so that you couldn't see it with limited human eyes, you would walk straight forward and slowly the space curved so you could end up walking a spiral or a circle without actually knowing it, thinking you walk forward. Also nothing, at the moment, is saying space could not be infinite; what's the problem with setting off and just keeping going on forever without ending up anywhere?

It's just the lack of imagination that creates limits [/QUOTE]

Let me explain. My "dimensions" for the universe shall be a three dimensional with a time parameter. Therefore we have:

X(T)
Y(T)
Z(T)

where X, Y, and Z represent Cartesian coordinates, and T represents the value of time. We shall let T = 0 at the beginning at the onset of the journey.

If the universe exists in such a way that the "straight path" is an enclosed curve (circle, ellipse, spiral, etc), then should there exist a point such that:

(X(m), Y(m), Z(m)) = (X(n), Y(n), Z(n))

If the universe is not curved in such a way that it is closed (such as a plane, parabola, hyperbola, etc), then there should exist:

lim f(x,y,z) = q
r->inf

since infinity is an abstract concept of a ludicrously large value, not a concrete value.

The point of the quote is that I do not believe the universe (or multiverses) can truly by infinite, that there must be an end.

[QUOTE=b0uncer]Do you mean, by "not scaling", that the resolution is set to 640x480 and at the same time the image size is a lot smaller than your screen size (i.e. the image is not full-screen)?

YES! That's exactly what I mean. For example, when I run , sc runs at 640x480, utilizing only a small portion in the center of the screen, instead of being stretched out to 1280x800, the display resolution. I want the full screen view so that I can see what I'm doing.

Offtopic but yes, you could end up in the same spot if you slipped in via another dimension!

And there are many many more than 3 dimensions in our reality!