Code center > Darwinbots3

Idea for the physics of bots environment.

(1/3) > >>

deoxymoron:
I have an idea for the physics of the bots environment.

instead of having qualities applied to the area, like the vicosity for example. perhaps instead this effect could occur if actually particles representing the medium which the bots live in could be used.

what i'm imagining is little tiny dots representing water/air/whatever particles as the medium.


The advantages:

*bots could develop way to manipulate the meduim to perform better. ei. swimming (perhaps with help from other bots)

*tiny tiny bots would be at a disadvantage as the medium would seem thicker for them- harder to push the dots out of the way.

*Also if random movement for the dots is used, tiny bots would find it hard to have a useful dna code to find food if they're constanly being pushed around. bigger bots won't have this problem.

*overall more accurate simulator of reality, esp if modeling bots on 'replicators' like RNA or just cells.


The Disadvantages:

*seems like a cpu hungry system to enact to program?

*would mean more complicated settings.


hope this hasn't been brought up already, if so disregard


good idea? discuss.

bacillus:
Seems like a good idea if you have a supercomputer handy, but I think any ordinary computer would break down with all the calculations involved. Step one would be to get the core functions running with minimal calculations before anything that spectacular can happen.
As for the idea itself, I could see how it could help with some details such as drag etc., but otherwise I don't see how it would differ from just using simple viscosity simulations.

ashton15:

--- Quote from: bacillus ---Seems like a good idea if you have a supercomputer handy, but I think any ordinary computer would break down with all the calculations involved. Step one would be to get the core functions running with minimal calculations before anything that spectacular can happen.
As for the idea itself, I could see how it could help with some details such as drag etc., but otherwise I don't see how it would differ from just using simple viscosity simulations.
--- End quote ---

that said the falling game of sand which seems to be some kind of CA runs well enough, just things like water flowing acurately don't tend to work well (see algodoo and oe cake) so I suppose I agree with mr green tentacle monster really . Another thing is why can't the advantages you described be simulted easily by areas anyway? And if you were to employ particles like that I'm not entirely sure it would actually be realistic as most cells are many times larger than particles which I think you mean to represent at a moleculur level. I definitely think things need to flow though which might be slightly harder to do.

P.S: sorry to disagree with you the first time I spoke to you

Numsgil:
A proper fluid simulation is crazy expensive CPU wise.  There was a fluid simulation version of Pong floating around on gamedev.net a while back.  It brought my 2 ghz machine to its knees.

As ashton points out, using something like the falling sand game might work.  But it's still a lot of computation, and it doesn't necessarily work well combined with "real" physics.

deoxymoron:
Hm, thought so... oh well. It seems like an important effect for evolution of multibots (something i'm trying to achieve)

is there any other (non-cpu hungry) system that could produce this effect. i mean, i really think the bots need a medium to be able to manipulate. i suppose it doesnt hav to have absolute real physics programmed into it, just something for the bots to push. this is how it would differ from normal vicosity simulator, i think? lol :/

I'm quite sure its currently not happening in this simulator? is it? i dont know. im still a dawinbots noob for now.

Nope, no supercomputer for me.  
currently using q6600, 4gb ram, 1gb video mem. win xp

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page