Tom & Lu Melly wrote:

> "Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
> news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> 
>> But...stars aren't evenly distributed. A random distribution would be
>> closer to reality.
> 
> I *think* you've misunderstood - it's avoiding the clumping of
> distribution at the poles that I'm trying to avoid. Of course the random
> numbers are evenly distributed - it's just that when you use them to
> rotate z, then y, you tend to get clumping at the top and bottom.

Well, there's nothing that forces random numbers to be evenly distributed. 
It is probable that they more or less are, but nothin stops them from 
tightly clustered around one single point, for example. I think Chris meant 
a distribution where every point is as far away from other points as 
possible, so that the distances between points are roughly equal.

Post a reply to this message