Warp wrote:
>   That shows the slope of the heightfield, not the *change* in slope,
> which is a bit more involved (it would require the derivative of the
> function which indicates the slope of the heightfield; since the slope
> function is the derivative of the heightfield function, the change in
> slope would thus be the double derivative of the heightfield function).
> 
>   Maybe the original poster really wanted to actually see the slope,
> rather than the change in slope, in which case your answer would be
> the correct one.
> 

Nope. I want the double derivative.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message