POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Real fire doesn't absorb, does it? : Re: Real fire doesn't absorb, does it? Server Time
8 Aug 2024 18:19:54 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Real fire doesn't absorb, does it?  
From: Mark Wagner
Date: 18 Dec 2000 02:27:15
Message: <3a3dbc53$1@news.povray.org>
Lance Birch <-> wrote in message <3a3c4b9c@news.povray.org>...
>Ken wrote:
>>
>> Which will also vary depending on where you intersect the flame since
>> there are varying temperatures within the flame itself.
>
>That's right, which is why it's such a difficult thing to accurately model.
>The other thing that makes it hard is that because it isn't a solid object,
>the changes in density aren't as black and white (which means neither is
the
>normal)... I have no idea how someone would go about doing it perfectly.


The density of the flame at any given point is well-defined.  I think that
the overall process for tracing the ray would be to solve the appropriate
initial-value differential equation -- not the world's easiest process.

--
Mark

"The derivative of sin(2x) is cos(2x)"  - Matt Giwer
"I never said that" - Matt Giwer
"I completely agree a flywheel can store a million times more energy if its
rotational velocity is measured in microradians instead of radians." - Matt
Giwer


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.