Post pictures up of your Props, or a link to your prop gallery on Ghostbusters Fans.
#4906853
Hi all! I first posted this up on the Ghostbusters subreddit but I understand that there's not a lot of action there, so I thought I'd share here as well!

For your consideration, I present my KBL Proton Pack Concept.
Image

For additional detail, I've also generated parts callouts for the pack and thrower.
Pack
Image

Thrower
Image

I recently joined my local Ghostbusters franchise and began making plans to build my pack. While researching the pack and parts, especially those of the TVG pack, I started to wonder about the design (I'm a tech geek and I was particularly bothered by how the booster tube could be changed to an expanding slime tube without affecting the basic function of the pack). I realized that the parts were kinda arbitrarily named by fans and their configuration didn't quite mesh with my (meager) understanding of how a particle accelerator works.

I decided to explore the design of a proton pack that a) was more in-line with nuclear science and that of particle accelerators, and b) a take on what the packs might look like if the Ghostbusters franchise were indeed established some 34 years prior, had seen 34 years of technological enhancement and refinement, and was relatively canon up to and including GB:TVG and its new fire modes.

Disclaimer: I'm not a scientist. I don't hold advanced degrees in nuclear physics or parapsychology. I DID spend a lot of time crawling through Wikipedia, YouTube, science articles, academic papers, and Ghostbusters wikis, collecting and collating anything to help put together a level of plausibility to the pseudoscience of Ghostbusters. I studied the history and components of particle accelerators from the first LINAC to the Plasma Wakefield Acelerator of the SLAC project (I highly recommend checking that out), protons to oscillating strange b-mesons, and GB elements from the KUD to the Composite Particle System. Everything I've put into the design has a root somewhere in real science or Ghostbusters lore.

The pack functions are very similar to the fully-upgraded Experimental Pack of Ghostbusters: The Video Game, with the notable exclusion of the Slime Blower attachment.
The KBL Pack sports the very latest in protonic projection technology for the subdual and tethering of ectoplasmic entities utilizing Proton Streams and the modified Capture Stream.
Alternate methods of energy deployment are available through the inclusion of the Dark Matter Generation system, enabling the Stasis Stream utility and the Hawking Dispersion utility (colloquially known as the 'Shockblast' despite having very little to do with electricity), and the Composite Particle Entanglement system, enabling the Meson Tag utility (unofficially called the StaB'M (STAbilized B-bar Meson)) and the Meson Pulse utility.

The pack features proprietary condensed technology for the generation, acceleration, collision, and emission of exotic particles and other classified functions geared toward paranormal elimination. All this hardware is mounted on a chassis that is protected with non-conductive construction, EMI shielding, shock absorption, on-board cooling, and element-resistant protective panels.
The pack features fully-ambidextrous configurations and control placement for the comfort of right AND left-handed operators. A thrower-mounted, adjustable OLED display provides a real-time readout of pack status and alerts while serving double-duty as a telemetry compiler and 'black box' in the "unlikely" event of catastrophic failure. Special protections for operators are now standard, including the removal of outdated 'slo-blo' fuses in favor of resettable circuit breakers (resulting in 98% fewer cases of severe burning and/or hair loss) and the HARM Inhibitor, eliminating greatly reducing the risk of protonic reversal for operators.

EDIT: To address the common feedback regarding the hybrid thrower variant, I'll paste here my reply to a comment on the reddit page:
One of my design goals from inception was to not venture too far into the realm of aggressive military hardware. I would never have updated the grips if it weren't for GB:TVG, and it being effectively canon. From a pragmatic, practical point of view, I couldn't see the wand staying as small and awkward as it is while regularly employing enhanced firepower (The Boson Dart itself being akin to an 'energy rpg').
The primarily featured design is a 'hybrid' grip', offering both a classic grip and a pistol grip, allowing one to shoulder the thrower for the sake of exercising increased control over those fire modes. It's entirely optional, with the classic grips available as replacements. I could not think of any other practical designs that would have served as well; there's no mistaking that rifles have come to their present design due to ergonomic evolution. The grips and body profile I settled on were the result of repeated attempts to come up with something practical, ergonomic, and believable.
Despite the my belief that Ghostbusters should remain strictly civilian and as non-threatening as possible, I had to admit that the weapon-like profile worked the best and to try to retain elements of the classic thrower to offset that.

This is the product of Phase 1 of my design. Next up, I plan on a 2nd concept phase to refine the look; it came out a little too neat and sterile. My premise being that the gear has evolved to keep pace with technological advancement and the PCOC forcing ever tighter standards on the gear. The packs are still hand-made, cobbled together by a team of engineers overseen by Dr. Spengler, in a high security lab somewhere, all to keep up with the demands of growing franchise locations - round 2 of my concept will be to make the components more visually interesting and rough up the design a little, AND to have the final design rendered in CAD or similar for phase 3, being physically building the pack.

If you're still reading or you TL;DR'd to the bottom, thanks for looking! This has been a rewarding project so far and I look forward to continuing the journey. There are lots of other great minds out there, so I welcome questions, feedback, and constructive criticism. Let me know what you think works and what doesn't, as well as what could be done to improve on the design.

Keep 'bustin! -KBL
Last edited by karbonbasedlife on July 18th, 2018, 8:07 am, edited 2 times in total.
robbritton, SPJ, Miranda liked this
#4906865
Kingpin wrote: July 15th, 2018, 4:26 pm Funky! Anyone ever tell you your art's film production concept quality?
Thanks, but it's not my art! Seems I neglected to plug my fantastic artist, Kevin Koesnodihardjo. I picked him for his skills with technical art like weapons and robots. He was extremely patient with all of my changes and really did a great job translating my ideas into visuals.
Check him out at https://www.instagram.com/koesnodihardjo or at https://www.artstation.com/kkdd.
SPJ liked this
#4906877
NotSabbat wrote: July 16th, 2018, 8:01 pm I...actually really like that...I kind of didnt want to, Im not going to lie. Great work. Really. Makes me want to make an STL of it and make one.
Thanks, I'm happy the design grew on you! I'm interested in hearing what aspects you weren't feeling.
If you have the ability to have the design rendered, I would be excited to collaborate on it! I'm not quite satisfied with the design - a few minor changes to make, details to lock in - but I DO need to find someone with the modeling skills to make a build plan.
Nice! Way better than what we saw in the 2016 film....
Thanks! In my research I watched all of the videos about the physicists that consulted for GB2016, and the science they worked in, and still found it lacking in a lot of ways. I even tried to reach out to the guy that consulted on the pack design, as well as a handful of other physicists, but understandably did not receive any replies.
SpaceLingo liked this
#4906884
karbonbasedlife wrote: July 17th, 2018, 10:04 am
NotSabbat wrote: July 16th, 2018, 8:01 pm I...actually really like that...I kind of didnt want to, Im not going to lie. Great work. Really. Makes me want to make an STL of it and make one.
Thanks, I'm happy the design grew on you! I'm interested in hearing what aspects you weren't feeling.
If you have the ability to have the design rendered, I would be excited to collaborate on it! I'm not quite satisfied with the design - a few minor changes to make, details to lock in - but I DO need to find someone with the modeling skills to make a build plan.
Thats the thing I REALLY like it. I kind of have an unreasonable dislike for people going "off script" with gear and I expected anther mashup of stuff, but this is a real work of art. I love that it is basically a streamlined version of the classic packs and that it has access panels and visual layers. Probably the first alternate protonpack that I would like to build. I was a little put off by the gun looking neutrino wand, but I saw that you had also made a more classical version and I just thought that was super cool. So, thats why I said that I kinda didn't want to like it, but I really do.

Also; Im not good at rendering stuff, though I may be able to make an file that could be printed from.

What is it that you dont like about it?
#4906895
... I expected anther mashup of stuff, but this is a real work of art. I love that it is basically a streamlined version of the classic packs and that it has access panels and visual layers. Probably the first alternate protonpack that I would like to build.
I couldn't ask for better praise short of Ghost Corps calling me up to use the pack in some form of media. I'm glad the detail and design I put into it with Kevin's help is so well appreciated. Thanks!
I was a little put off by the gun looking neutrino wand...
I get that more often than anything else. As such, I've gone ahead and edited my original post with my thoughts on the necessity of that design, the hybrid grip. I hope that helps, but yes, the classic grip is meant to be available as well.
What is it that you dont like about it?
It's still a work in progress; this is the first iteration. I'm very proud of it but, as I mentioned in the post, it's just a little too clean. I want it to be modern and sleek, but I don't want it to look perfect - as in the science of miniaturizing particle accelerators has come along but is still a slightly haphazard practice.
In addition, the geometry is a little on the plain side. The classic pack had several planes, protrusions, and angles. I want my pack to stay sleek with the cover on but it should be a little more interesting inside. Also, due to time constraints with my artist, the throwers internals didn't get full treatment I intended so I'd like to get those worked on again.
#4906951
I like it a lot too.

The original proton pack was such a strange thing in terms of design.

1. It was a portable nuclear accelerator
2. It was made in the early 80's by hobbyist scientists
3. Yet it still looked factory machined. Almost mass produced. It had molded covers, warning labels, etc.
4. But it was very obviously not a "military" object, but an electrical equipment device.

It's really hard to describe, but most people when they draw up a contemporary proton pack design end up creating something that looks like a World War II portable flame thrower. More or less. It may be a 1940's look and have valves and levers or it may be a 2240's Crysis 3 look, sleek, small and symmetrical. It just ends up looking "military". Too clean.

And not "home made highly dangerous and unstable electrical equipment." Yours kind of also looks like it could be military gear. Part of that is the wand, I'll get back to that.

How to make it look less clean?

The original pack had various individual parts that were connected via limited external wires and tubing.

I would assume that even considering the advancements in computer engineering, and miniaturization of chips and pcb's in 35 years, the parts with tubing would remain to a certain degree. Whether it's coolant, or the transfer of a material that needs shielding etc.

Possibly some may be eliminated alltogether with a completely new way of doing things. Your packaging the elements more tightly inside the unit I believe is a realistic representation of how the pack may have looked had it been designed today instead of in '84. But it looks too clean, too symmetrical.

Perhaps distinguish more in terms of spacing the elements? Heat shielding, venting and air flow would still be an issue and a reason for a more asymmetric design. Syd Mead is an excellent visual artist that does this well. His spaceship interiors in say Aliens are a good example of things looking like they serve purpose, tightly packed together but still differentiated.

I suppose one way to do this exercise would have been to analyse the difference in particle accelerator design and manufacturing from 1984 and today. A difficult exercise probably, seeing as the accelerators were likely the same and just incrementally updated. But that would allow one to get an understanding of how these "miniature" versions would be different then and now.

Another way would be looking at that great Ghostbusters comic. I forgot the name. Where the 4 busters are each thrown in different time periods and have to make a proton pack with the materials available at that time.

Venkman: wild west
Ray: medieval times
Egon: far future
Winston: remains in present

The pack designs in that comic really display the "essence" of a proton pack by allowing you to see what it may have looked like in different time periods.

Don't get me wrong though. Your design is EXCELLENT and a very realistic depiction of how that thing would have been designed had it been made today. I'm really pushing myself to offer advice to make it even better.


My favourite part of the original pack was definitely the neutrona wand. It's design is absolutely unique. There has never been anything since like that. I think of it more like a large light diode instead of a gun, also the way it's held, it's design so obviously saying "you need TWO hands to hang on to this". Yet at the same time looking like a somewhat fragile piece of equipment with the metal flip switches, etc. It had no equal if you ask me.

That's one of the places the 2016 movie got it wrong if you ask me. They deemed the wands as looking too meek and wimpy and beefed them up with cannon like barrels, etc. That was the whole point! That this thin, asymmetric, understated, ungainly piece of equipment threw out such a massively destructive force of rubberised light.
karbonbasedlife liked this
#4906961
I like it a lot too.
Thanks for the feedback! I appreciate your thoughts and have a few ideas to go with them.
Possibly some may be eliminated alltogether with a completely new way of doing things.
One means of reducing the exposed wiring/ducting that I have on paper but isn't shown is a coolant dispersal plate which replaces what was called the Motherboard on the classic packs. The idea is that the coolant plate has all of the channels going to/from the various components housed inside, along with heat sinks and fans seen on the sides. The components are fed coolant from risers that come out from that plate. In that way, I can say that all required parts are cooled without having a ton of visual clutter. The rest, the beam channels and power supply lines, can't easily be hidden so I've left them out for that bit of chaos that is part of the pack's charm.
But it looks too clean, too symmetrical.
I agree with the cleanliness. As stated in my post, I'm planning a 2nd round to shake it up a bit. Regarding symmetry, I'm not sure I follow. The exterior, yes, it's symmetrical because it's meant to be a refined, clean enclosure. The interior, however, is barely controlled chaos. If you're referring to how all of the parts rest on a single plane, I'm aware and I plan on shaking that up in round 2 as well.
Another way would be looking at that great Ghostbusters comic. I forgot the name.
Displaced Aggression. Neat story, but they don't give you much info on Koza'rai and Rachel is a walking Deus Ex Machina that kills the story's gravitas a bit. Regarding the packs, I disagree. They are the classic packs just retrofitted with what they had in their respective time periods (Peter's steampunk mods compared to Ray's replacing the thrower with a sword. There's no way steam power could run an accelerator.).
That this thin, asymmetric, understated, ungainly piece of equipment threw out such a massively destructive force of rubberised light.
I love your thoughts on the classic thrower, well said. I've shared my thoughts on the design of the hybrid thrower in the original post but, to follow up on that, were it not for having to shoehorn more tech in that, logically, HAD to be in the thrower, I would have kept to that classic appearance other than trying to make the thrower symmetrical; the symmetry there being important to making the thrower easy to use for left and right-handed persons - something I deemed a requirement given my thoughts on the addition of other Ghostbusters franchises.
#4906963
karbonbasedlife wrote: July 20th, 2018, 8:37 am
I like it a lot too.
Thanks for the feedback! I appreciate your thoughts and have a few ideas to go with them.
Possibly some may be eliminated alltogether with a completely new way of doing things.
One means of reducing the exposed wiring/ducting that I have on paper but isn't shown is a coolant dispersal plate which replaces what was called the Motherboard on the classic packs. The idea is that the coolant plate has all of the channels going to/from the various components housed inside, along with heat sinks and fans seen on the sides. The components are fed coolant from risers that come out from that plate. In that way, I can say that all required parts are cooled without having a ton of visual clutter. The rest, the beam channels and power supply lines, can't easily be hidden so I've left them out for that bit of chaos that is part of the pack's charm.
But it looks too clean, too symmetrical.
I agree with the cleanliness. As stated in my post, I'm planning a 2nd round to shake it up a bit. Regarding symmetry, I'm not sure I follow. The exterior, yes, it's symmetrical because it's meant to be a refined, clean enclosure. The interior, however, is barely controlled chaos. If you're referring to how all of the parts rest on a single plane, I'm aware and I plan on shaking that up in round 2 as well.
Another way would be looking at that great Ghostbusters comic. I forgot the name.
Displaced Aggression. Neat story, but they don't give you much info on Koza'rai and Rachel is a walking Deus Ex Machina that kills the story's gravitas a bit. Regarding the packs, I disagree. They are the classic packs just retrofitted with what they had in their respective time periods (Peter's steampunk mods compared to Ray's replacing the thrower with a sword. There's no way steam power could run an accelerator.).
That this thin, asymmetric, understated, ungainly piece of equipment threw out such a massively destructive force of rubberised light.
I love your thoughts on the classic thrower, well said. I've shared my thoughts on the design of the hybrid thrower in the original post but, to follow up on that, were it not for having to shoehorn more tech in that, logically, HAD to be in the thrower, I would have kept to that classic appearance other than trying to make the thrower symmetrical; the symmetry there being important to making the thrower easy to use for left and right-handed persons - something I deemed a requirement given my thoughts on the addition of other Ghostbusters franchises.
Yeah I see your point on the comic, it was farcical in a way, but I gave the example to illustrate the "essence" of proton packs, not neccessarily the practical feasibility of those particular packs from the comics.

In a way I'm trying to say is that what made Ghostbusters proton packs what they are was the "unrefined" nature of them. The instability. Even down to that ominous deep hum when powering up. A sound that says "you better know what you are doing with this." The whole design in its entirety was literally a work of art. Well it was made by artists afterall.

Let me try to explain:

Image

With symmetry I meant left right symmetry when looking at the packs from behind the wearer and also profile symmetry. The ion arm on the upper left, the tube snaking out of the lower right. That asymmetry adds interest and is the basis of the "cobbled together" look. They also balance each other out in terms of weighting.

I believe the 2016 movie also underscored that aspect, that asymmetry is a representation of chaos.

I can't remember where I came across it but I remember reading that the designer of the '84 packs made their silhouette so that the wearer would look more heroic, with broader shoulders and a thinner waist. The ion arm upper left and the upper right side are wider than the leaf shape center of the pack above the cyclotron. That coke bottle shape was made deliberately to accentuate the shoulder width of the wearer. (Not being wider than the shoulders of the wearer mind you, just accentuating the lines.)

Also in profile (viewed side on), the packs are designed to accentuate a thin waistline. The ion arm and that black tube snaking upper right accentuate rear shoulders and upper back muscles. The mid section accentuating a thin waist and the protruding cyclotron representing the buttocks. It sounds funny but it is really thought through in terms of accentuating the human form. So even that black tube snaking around the red warning label to the upper right (which you may have thought was random) serves an artistic purpose; accentuating the right upper back/shoulder, the same way the ion arm accentuates the left.

Even the placing and asymmetric coil of the ribbon cable, arching from lower left to centre line and wide at the bottom to coiled up at the top, serves a purpose; balancing out the ridge on the right arching from lower right to centre line. Together they create that coke bottle shape.

Even when not worn, the weighting of the elements follows artistic principle. That curved line (ridge) on the right side of the pack above the cyclotron, curves up and to the left. It counterbalances the weight on the upper left (ion arm) and at the same time it delineates and frees up (creates negative space) for the area top right, where the heaviest positive space part of the pack is (neutrona wand).

So there is a symmetry hidden in its asymmetry.

It's details like that.

1. The asymmetry indicating a cobbled together, dangerous pedigree.
2. The asymmetry is also thought through in terms of weighting positive and negative space and ratio.
3. The artistic design finally also accentuates the human form.

The reason people are still in love with it 35 years later is that there was a real thought through, artistic value to them.

The more you look at the '84 packs the more you see how much artistic craft has gone into the design. (So much more than the '16 packs imo.)

Your design is beautiful though, I can't wait to see what you'll do more. Have you thought of the traps and how they might work yet?
#4906964
Have you thought of the traps and how they might work yet?
I have! Not to the same extent, but I have thoughts and some plans.
I like elements of ALL of the major trap designs, to date. I am IN LOVE with the classic trap's outer shell/inner cell design and the action of emptying the trap in the ECU. It's the absolute most sensible part of their tech as designed back then and that scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLwKMkdVMnQ) is still one of my favorite tech moments in any movie ever.
I don't have much to say about the XGB trap other than I appreciate its decidedly 'THIS SIDE UP' shape that makes it's operation almost foolproof and that I like the hand operation of the trigger mechanism. Other than that, I found it large, ungainly, and I couldn't understand the need for such a large 'capture surface'.
Of the GB2016 trap, I like the rugged exterior with all of the sensitive parts tucked away, remote operation, and the 'double door' action of its capture system - that is to say it has the spring-open outer door AS WELL AS the rotating cylindrical inner door.

Putting all of those elements together is something I haven't put a lot of work into yet, but I have an outline. I've done some scientific gymnastics to explain the use of muons in the trap operation such that I don't have to change it away from being called a "muon trap", but the other side of that coin is going to be putting the components in there for the reasonable generation and emittance of muons.
I'll probably look to emulate the precedent I started with the pack of putting all of the components inside of a protective shell, probably underneath like that of the GB2016. The shell will be shaped to ensure it operates only in the correct orientation like the XGB trap, but much smaller and more traditionally shaped otherwise. In order to incorporate the double-door design of GB2016, but the inner/outer of the classic, I'm looking at interchangeable cells of varying capacities that are removed from the side like one might remove a battery in a conventional device. The idea there is to increase the efficiency of the trap by overcoming one of the original deficiencies, the one-and-done use of a trap. Multiple cells would allow for multiple captures and varying the size makes for tailoring the capacity to the job.
The alternative is to retain the single-capture-cell idea, but make the cells smaller in general to facilitate carrying more than one per person on a job.
Other than that, I think modern tech calls for wireless activation with an optional wire for backup in case of wireless failure; choice of hand or foot operation of trigger mechanism; possibly a thrower-mounted trigger mechanism if wireless, so hands don't have to come off of the thrower; and an optional PKE sensor module that would allow for automatic activation if the proximity of a PKE signature reaches a set threshold, allowing for autonomous operation.

Wow, I am NOT good at short answers when it comes to this stuff.
SPJ liked this
#4906992
I like that you basically took all of the craziness of the the original and basically put an enclosure over it. The parts on GB1 packs always seemed like they would be easily damaged, the enclosure is a good way to mitigate that, especially since it can be removed. As a prop it would look amazing if there was lighting of some kind behind the Hex mesh. I really do have the strongest urge to build this. If you are planning revisions, do you have a time frame?
#4907030
karbonbasedlife wrote: July 20th, 2018, 10:30 am
Have you thought of the traps and how they might work yet?
I have! Not to the same extent, but I have thoughts and some plans.
I like elements of ALL of the major trap designs, to date. I am IN LOVE with the classic trap's outer shell/inner cell design and the action of emptying the trap in the ECU. It's the absolute most sensible part of their tech as designed back then and that scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLwKMkdVMnQ) is still one of my favorite tech moments in any movie ever.
I don't have much to say about the XGB trap other than I appreciate its decidedly 'THIS SIDE UP' shape that makes it's operation almost foolproof and that I like the hand operation of the trigger mechanism. Other than that, I found it large, ungainly, and I couldn't understand the need for such a large 'capture surface'.
Of the GB2016 trap, I like the rugged exterior with all of the sensitive parts tucked away, remote operation, and the 'double door' action of its capture system - that is to say it has the spring-open outer door AS WELL AS the rotating cylindrical inner door.

Putting all of those elements together is something I haven't put a lot of work into yet, but I have an outline. I've done some scientific gymnastics to explain the use of muons in the trap operation such that I don't have to change it away from being called a "muon trap", but the other side of that coin is going to be putting the components in there for the reasonable generation and emittance of muons.
I'll probably look to emulate the precedent I started with the pack of putting all of the components inside of a protective shell, probably underneath like that of the GB2016. The shell will be shaped to ensure it operates only in the correct orientation like the XGB trap, but much smaller and more traditionally shaped otherwise. In order to incorporate the double-door design of GB2016, but the inner/outer of the classic, I'm looking at interchangeable cells of varying capacities that are removed from the side like one might remove a battery in a conventional device. The idea there is to increase the efficiency of the trap by overcoming one of the original deficiencies, the one-and-done use of a trap. Multiple cells would allow for multiple captures and varying the size makes for tailoring the capacity to the job.
The alternative is to retain the single-capture-cell idea, but make the cells smaller in general to facilitate carrying more than one per person on a job.
Other than that, I think modern tech calls for wireless activation with an optional wire for backup in case of wireless failure; choice of hand or foot operation of trigger mechanism; possibly a thrower-mounted trigger mechanism if wireless, so hands don't have to come off of the thrower; and an optional PKE sensor module that would allow for automatic activation if the proximity of a PKE signature reaches a set threshold, allowing for autonomous operation.

Wow, I am NOT good at short answers when it comes to this stuff.
Haha, cool that you have an interest in how this stuff is supposed to operate! I did some investigating of my own on the trap, taking into consideration the decals used. Also how the thrower was supposed to work was figured out sometime ago by another user, from the decals on that.

These are those two threads:

http://www.gbfans.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 6#p4903416

http://www.gbfans.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 2#p4906222

Also Shadowdion did excellent work on the Ghostbusters Field Manual v89 and V91 (the latter including the GBTVG tech as well as GB1 and GB2).

https://www.deviantart.com/shadowdion/a ... -365102552


Although me and him agree on almost everything we disagree with his proton streams creating psions which are required to enable trapping.

For the simple reason that we see many examples in canon that a ghost is caught using just the trap and no streams (e.g. the jogger ghost in GB2, and other such examples.)

I did my best on the physics of the muon trap operation on the thread above (also considering the nature of a muon and why Egon would choose the decay of that elementary particle over others.)

The last post on the wand thread also makes perfect sense to me regarding the circular decals matching up with stream power (full circle=full stream, half circle = half stream, etc.) and the bar graph indicating the current power level.

Love to hear your opinion on those!

PS: Before anyone says, hey it's just a movie man, forget thinking about the accurate science of it!! I'd refer you to the Ghostbusters 3: Hellbent script

https://www.facebook.com/ProtonCharging ... =3&theater

Where Aykroyd and Ramis write about using the "Veneziano Amplitude" which in actual theoretical physics "has many of the features needed to explain the physical properties of strongly interacting mesons, such as symmetry and duality".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veneziano_amplitude

GB3 Hellbent was never made, but cue GB:TVG script in 2009 which Ramis and Aykroyd worked on the science and Ghostbusting elements of and surprise surprise it features mesons in the meson collider.

The "science" of Ghostbusters stemming from Aykroyd and Ramis is surprisingly in depth, accurate and detailed.
#4907060
The "science" of Ghostbusters stemming from Aykroyd and Ramis is surprisingly in depth, accurate and detailed.
Those are some great links! I really liked the OpMan, and you put some serious thought into the trap, very cool. I've got pages and pages of notes on the various particles employed by my pack and their generation. Maybe I'll roll those up into a digestible format and post them.
NotSabbat liked this
#4907288
I know that no one has responded to this in a while, but I was just bumbling around and saw this design. I was wondering if there were some dimensions you were thinking of for this? Is this something you are planning on building?

    You're a good egg, Alex Newborn.

    I recently started working on the motherboard. I b[…]

    I explained to my son that the movie was delayed u[…]

    After 28 years....

    28 years after watching my first episode of The Re[…]