 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> Not really, my idea was a curvature pattern, where the value depends on
> the curvature of the surface. So you could have the patina only be in
> concave areas, and the tips be polished metal, like the patina is worn
> off in those areas. This kind of thing is already possible with simple
> objects, but for more complex shapes a special pattern would be
> needed.(or an image would have to be used to control it)
>
I may be completely misinformed here, but couldn't something similar to the
current isosurface evaluation method be used to determine curvature?
Margus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3898CE3A.30E36D45@peak.edu.ee>, Margus Ramst
<mar### [at] peak eduee> wrote:
> I may be completely misinformed here, but couldn't something similar to
> the
> current isosurface evaluation method be used to determine curvature?
I am not sure what you mean...as I understand it, the isosurface solver
takes samples along the ray, using the maximum gradient of the function
to determine if there is a possible intersection between each pair of
samples. I don't see how this could be applied to finding the curvature
of a specific point.
--
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > I may be completely misinformed here
:)
Margus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
metaphorically speaking...
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:3898BB89.35AA5814@faricy.net...
> cadman wrote:
>
> > YES YES YES!! That would make light-years of difference in realism. I
am
> > curious to see where this goes.
>
> light years measure distance...
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
> ___ ______________________________
> | \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
> |_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> light years measure distance...
Time, speed, and distance.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote in message <38996327.5E5FAB92@pacbell.net>...
>
>> light years measure distance...
>
>Time, speed, and distance.
>
???????????????
Explain please
Gail
*******************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * ERROR: COFFEE.COM not found *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Insert cup and press any key *
*******************************************************************
* Definition of an upgrade: Take the old bugs out, put new ones in*
*******************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
:> light years measure distance...
: Time, speed, and distance.
Nope, only distance.
In the same way newtons measure force, not weight, distance and time.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
But you are right for light year this is only for distance,
1 light year is the distance that the light do in 1 year.
This is roughly 3*10^8 (m/s)*(3600*24*365)(s)=3*10^8 * 31,536*10^6
=9.46*10^15 meters =9.46*10^12 Km.
Fabian.
Nieminen Juha wrote:
>
> Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> :> light years measure distance...
>
> : Time, speed, and distance.
>
> Nope, only distance.
> In the same way newtons measure force, not weight, distance and time.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
> But you are right for light year this is only for distance,
> 1 light year is the distance that the light do in 1 year.
> This is roughly 3*10^8 (m/s)*(3600*24*365)(s)=3*10^8 * 31,536*10^6
> =9.46*10^15 meters =9.46*10^12 Km.
My calculator gives it as 9,460,528,404,879.4 km
(3*10^8 is a *very* rough measure (and a year is 365.24 days))
How come people never use the word megameters or gigameters or terrameters?
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fabian Brau <fab### [at] umhacbe> wrote:
: The weight is expressed in Newtons but the mass in Kg :).
Also forces are measured in Newtons.
An alternative measure for force is kilopond, which is 9.8 newtons.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
