Code center > Darwinbots3

Idea for the physics of bots environment.

<< < (2/3) > >>

Numsgil:
Well, I do want something like ant nests.  So bots need to be able to dig in to shapes.  I can also see something like "wind" or "current" getting implemented.  Something like a static vector field you could import or paint in that could move materials and bots around the world to keep things from stagnating too bad.  And of course I'll figure out the physics to simulate things like squid bots (multibots that can move around using jet propulsion) and fish bots (undulating motion to produce motion) and swim bots (breast stroke motion to produce movement).

deoxymoron:
cool, i look forward to seeing that!

bacillus:

--- Quote from: ashton15 ---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
--- End quote ---
I guess the falling sand game works fine, but I have a sneaking supspicion that the physics behind that is horribly oversimplified-it's something closer akin to Game Of Life, and mixing discrete and nondiscrete can be a bit of a nightmare  
Always good to get some new ideas flowing though  



--- Quote from: Numsgil ---Well, I do want something like ant nests.  So bots need to be able to dig in to shapes.  I can also see something like "wind" or "current" getting implemented.  Something like a static vector field you could import or paint in that could move materials and bots around the world to keep things from stagnating too bad.  And of course I'll figure out the physics to simulate things like squid bots (multibots that can move around using jet propulsion) and fish bots (undulating motion to produce motion) and swim bots (breast stroke motion to produce movement).
--- End quote ---
Shape digging and propulsion are things I would really want to see-how much of the physics could be generalized into one variable with multiple instances, so you can iterate through instead of checking if Feature X is active? More generalization would free up some memory, especially when minimizing environmental features (No doubt you've thought about this already, just curious as to the extent   )

Numsgil:

--- Quote from: bacillus ---Shape digging and propulsion are things I would really want to see-how much of the physics could be generalized into one variable with multiple instances, so you can iterate through instead of checking if Feature X is active? More generalization would free up some memory, especially when minimizing environmental features (No doubt you've thought about this already, just curious as to the extent   )
--- End quote ---

The goal is to set things up so that:

a ) the physical dimensions of the simulation do not negatively impact performance.  That is, you only pay CPU for things that are actually in the world, and not for empty space.
b ) the simulation can run in linear time for the number of "features" in the world.  Like bots, shapes, etc.
c ) the memory cost of the world is linear to the number of features, and independent of world size (so same thing as a and b, but with memory).

Beyond that it's hard to get in to specifics.

bacillus:
No need, that's all I wanted to know  

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page