Chris Huff wrote:

> Hmm, that could work, though I would have to save the points for later
> use, kind of like a large number of point emitters...how should I take
> the samples, though? If I take them from the surface of a sphere toward
> the center of the bounding box, there will be a serious tendency for the
> center of the object unless it is hollow and fairly spherical. Maybe if
> I took them from the three sides of a box...along each coordinate axis,
> in other words.

Could work but maybe you could specify some different types of sampling -
like the box method, point & bbox method, sphere & bbox method, random
points in random directions et al.

> This actually existed in the first versions of my patch, in fact, it was
> *the* first version of my patch, but I have removed it because it was
> too difficult to maintain while the rest of the patch was changing so
> rapidly...I do plan on replacing it, however.
> Hmm, particle density...I hadn't thought of that. I will need to write a
> function to compute this for particle fission/fusion anyway, so might as
> well include it...

Are U going to add propogation reactions like when a particle interacts with
a surface/other particle it creates new particles & changes in some way.

> BTW, one other problem with the particle_system pattern was that it was
> slow,since all the particles had to be calculated. I plan on adding a
> bounding structure based on recursively subdividing boxes(I think it is
> called an octree...) or planes(I have no idea what this is called) to
> speed up inter-particle force calculations, so that should really speed
> up the patterns...

What like ignoring particles so far away that the contribution is
negligible.

Another pattern could be based on the velocity & or direction of the
particles.

--
Bye
Pabs

Post a reply to this message