Author Topic: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles  (Read 12168 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline shmibs

  • しらす丼
  • Administrator
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2132
  • Rating: +281/-3
  • try to be ok, ok?
    • View Profile
    • shmibbles.me
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2012, 10:48:22 am »
that's really cool =D
maybe it could be made into a game of some sort. something like a flea circus, where the player has to set up a number of elements and try to get it to complete the course.

The fiziness is actually quite realistic. We just happen to be looking at very, very small amounts of water. Fish breathe the 'fizz' in real water.

dissolved oxygen isn't really the same thing, and that only comes in a few parts per million, anyways, so it'd be unlikely to see even one with this number of particles :P
« Last Edit: November 20, 2012, 10:48:48 am by shmibs »

Offline Eiyeron

  • Urist McEiyolobster
  • LV10 31337 u53r (Next: 2000)
  • **********
  • Posts: 1430
  • Rating: +130/-10
  • (-_(//));
    • View Profile
    • Rétro-Actif : Rétro/Prog/Blog
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2012, 03:50:37 pm »
This thread interesses me... What about 3D fluid cellular automata? This is giving me ideas with trixel rendering...

Offline shmibs

  • しらす丼
  • Administrator
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2132
  • Rating: +281/-3
  • try to be ok, ok?
    • View Profile
    • shmibbles.me
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2012, 05:00:52 pm »
voxels you mean?

that would be REALLY REALLY cool =D
someone should make a 3d dust toy.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2012, 05:01:59 pm by shmibs »

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2012, 05:30:28 pm »
Well, but if we look at water on a molecular level we find many, many variable-length gaps between the molecules. Often, these are larger than the molecules themselves.


Offline ruler501

  • Meep
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2475
  • Rating: +66/-9
  • Crazy Programmer
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2012, 05:45:36 pm »
voxels you mean?

that would be REALLY REALLY cool =D
someone should make a 3d dust toy.
The people from powder actually talked about that, but they decided that it would be too inefficient(If I remember correctly). It'd be really interesting but could run really slow if you put much in it
I currently don't do much, but I am a developer for a game you should totally try out called AssaultCube Reloaded download here https://assaultcuber.codeplex.com/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/CS/M/S d- s++: a---- C++ UL++ P+ L++ E---- W++ N o? K- w-- o? !M V?
PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP++ t 5? X R tv-- b+++ DI+ D+ G++ e- h! !r y

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2012, 05:50:17 pm »
well, powder is written in java......:P

Minecraft is essentially a minimal CA with some real physics on top.

Offline Xeda112358

  • they/them
  • Moderator
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 4704
  • Rating: +719/-6
  • Calc-u-lator, do doo doo do do do.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2012, 07:47:14 pm »
Hmm, actually, the only difficulty with 3D stuff is that you would need to store the 3D image. Then, you just need a creative way to "pixel test." For example, if I wanted to use a 3D graph of z(x,y), when a particle moves "down", you would pixel test by testing if it is within a certain bound of the equation (for example, you could test between x+.05 and x-.05 and the same for the y values to see if there is a barrier in the region). Then, you need an efficient way to check for collision with particles XD Yeah, I guess that could get inefficient pretty quickly o.o

Offline aeTIos

  • Nonbinary computing specialist
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 3915
  • Rating: +184/-32
    • View Profile
    • wank.party
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2012, 10:02:09 am »
or just have cubes?
I'm not a nerd but I pretend:

Offline shmibs

  • しらす丼
  • Administrator
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2132
  • Rating: +281/-3
  • try to be ok, ok?
    • View Profile
    • shmibbles.me
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2012, 10:32:03 am »
xeda, i don't see why the movements, at least, couldn't be done the exact same way as they are in 2d, just using a 3d matrix?
the only thing that would really slow stuff down would be graphics.

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #24 on: November 21, 2012, 02:54:37 pm »
Shmibs, the speed per-pixel isn't the problem. It comes more from the fact that you have an extreme number more pixels to deal with.

Example: A small box of water (60x60x60 should be enough to show it well) has 216000 pixels, versus a 2D 3600 pixels. That's 60x the work.

Offline Xeda112358

  • they/them
  • Moderator
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 4704
  • Rating: +719/-6
  • Calc-u-lator, do doo doo do do do.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #25 on: November 21, 2012, 07:04:31 pm »
Yeah, it is more an issue of memory as opposed to computing. The 3D rule would be move down if possible, or choose one of the directions on the X-Z plane if that didn't work, or move up if none of those worked. I was trying to see how it would work if you used 3D equations (I imagined using something like Graph3D, tilting the graph, and having the particles all fall out around the graph). That would be easier on memory, but much slower to handle all of the collisions.

Offline Roboman

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
  • Rating: +10/-2
  • These peanuts taste so good!
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2012, 11:07:37 am »
ATM we don't care too much at how fast it is, lets just get the memory issue sorted out so we can get a running version :D
And if it is REALLY slow... lets just take a time laps screenie XD
« Last Edit: December 02, 2012, 11:09:30 am by Roboman »
:w00t:
UP-UP-DOWN-DOWN-LEFT-RIGHT-LEFT-RIGHT-B-A-ENTER


I always post in good faith!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith
If I end up being rude please tell me and understand!
Spoiler For Spoiler:
:-[  I never mean to say things ... negativley...
I am a bit socialy aqward so I often dont pick up on sarcasm or recognize myself being rude...

...

I am sorry for any offence...

Offline cooliojazz

  • Support Staff
  • LV7 Elite (Next: 700)
  • *******
  • Posts: 619
  • Rating: +66/-9
  • I omnoms on your soul
    • View Profile
    • Unreal Phantasies
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #27 on: December 02, 2012, 01:21:09 pm »
Actually, the other day I just happened to make a 3d Cellular Automata to test the new 3D engine i was working on =P  Here, check it out!

It takes command line arguments <mode> <size>, where mode is 0 for a 3d life-like simulation, and 1 is my fail attempt at a water simulation, and size is a number that determines how big the "field" is.  the defaults are 0 and 20, and i would recommend not going over 100.

Fly around with WASD and arrow keys, and change the simulation speed with - and =

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B7yzzD91paU_aUpwMHhKUEtRblU
Spoiler For Random signess:
You can not beat my skills.
Trust me.
So don't even try.
And remember never to trust someone who says, "Trust me."

TI File Editor Progress: Remade in java like a boss. 50% we'll call it? IDK =P
Java Libraries: JIRC - 90% JTIF - 5%
TI Projects: Unreal Notator - -5000%
Nomcraft, a Bukkit mod
Some of the music I write can be found here | The Rest Should Be Here (Bandcamp)

Offline nikitouzz

  • LV5 Advanced (Next: 300)
  • *****
  • Posts: 215
  • Rating: +22/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #28 on: December 02, 2012, 04:32:02 pm »
good jobs :)

can I see the source code ? :) i'm interressing because i write in french one tutorial of the cellular automate :)

thanks
mes records personels :

2x2x2 : 2.18 secondes / 2x2x2 une main : 21.15 secondes / 2x2x2 yeux bandés : 47.59
3x3x3 : 5.97 secondes / 3x3x3 une main : 49.86 secondes
4x4x4 : 1.49 minutes / 4x4x4 une main : 6.50 minutes
5x5x5 : 4.10 minutes / 5x5x5 une main : 18.02 minutes
6x6x6 : 8.10 minutes
7x7x7 : 16.03 minutes
9x9x9 : 58.26 minutes

megaminx : 5.59 minutes / pyraminx : 7.91 secondes / square-one : 1.07 minutes

Offline willrandship

  • Omnimagus of the Multi-Base.
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2953
  • Rating: +98/-13
  • Insert sugar to begin programming subroutine.
    • View Profile
Re: Observations of Cellular Automata simulating particles
« Reply #29 on: December 02, 2012, 08:43:19 pm »
Your program has no way to move up and down. Sideways movement is relative to the direction faced, but vertical movement is not tied in the same way. Not sure if that's intentional.