On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 21:00:51 -0400, Christopher James Huff
<cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> > For the opinion "Converting arbitrary point sets into meshes or surfaces is a
> > difficult task" I replaied that isosurface can be considered as set of points
> > where desription of set is a given function. Of course the difficult part is
> > finding that function for given set which is another task. I just wanted 
> > point out that isosurface can be a tool in mentioned "conversion".
>
> But you implied that knowing the functions would give you some way to 
> find the sum...or were you talking about writing a function by hand that 
> would give the same shape as the sum? Again, you haven't given a clear 
> description of what you mean by using an isosurface for "conversion".

Ok, example: I have a set of points. The rule used to create this set is that
all points of this set have the same distance from center and all points have
their coordinates positive in value. So I can express this set as:

  A={ P(x,y,z) : x^2+y^2+z^2=distance^2 , x>0 , y>0 , z>0 }

I can easly "convert" it into isosurface, can't I?

ABX

Post a reply to this message