Messages

46

Newbie / hello

« on: April 30, 2010, 12:42:09 AM »

Hi!
Just breaking the silence...

47

Suggestions / veg energy extraction

« on: April 28, 2010, 12:57:44 AM »

Remember-there's no such thing as a free lunch.  

48

Darwinbots3 / Idea for the physics of bots environment.

« on: April 27, 2010, 05:48:31 AM »

No need, that's all I wanted to know  

49

Suggestions / veg energy extraction

« on: April 27, 2010, 01:27:21 AM »

Okay, so what do you do when a plant has an extremely low reproduction threshold?
In some way, the plant shrinking does make it harder to hit. The important thing is to check whether your ideas make sense in real biology as well-smaller species are usually easier to eat, and the only way you wouldn't eat them is if it's not worth the effort.

50

Darwinbots3 / Idea for the physics of bots environment.

« on: April 27, 2010, 01:16:01 AM »

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

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  

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).

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   )

51

Darwinbots3 / Idea for the physics of bots environment.

« on: April 25, 2010, 04:15:30 AM »

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.

52

Suggestions / Elo rating + league + bots

« on: April 11, 2010, 03:40:10 AM »

That's the long-term plan. Until then, they have to play Gladiators...

53

Bot Tavern / A Cosine function, with no tablebase usage.

« on: April 10, 2010, 02:10:08 AM »

Just taylor series should do it. I'm sure those units sound a bit off to me, and you'd have to break down each polynomial into several steps to fit it into the 32000-range, dropping a whole lot of accuracy long the way. Did you remember to scale it up so it doesn't get rounded to one or zero?

54

Off Topic / Divide by zero

« on: April 04, 2010, 03:47:35 PM »

You are probably thinking of Gödel's incompleteness theorem, which says no consistent set of axioms can prove its own consistency.

That's the one!

55

Newbie / My Bot

« on: April 04, 2010, 03:45:21 PM »

The point is to have the conditions inside the virus, not outside.
Which reminds me, the virus should only activate after robage > 0. You have no idea how many times a virus went wrong for me because it was inserted as the first gene and screwed everything up on reproduction.

56

Newbie / My Bot

« on: April 03, 2010, 05:23:46 PM »

The replicator code should really be inside the virus. Not only does that make the virus copy itself in new hosts, it also prevents infections from shifting the DNA and messing it up (this is only really important if the opponent also uses viruses.)

57

Off Topic / Divide by zero

« on: April 02, 2010, 06:02:50 PM »

There's a proof by somebody whose name eludes me at this moment that states that if mathematics is without contradictions, then it is contradictory itself. Don't ask me how it works, but I thought this would be the best time to bring it up.

58

Off Topic / Divide by zero

« on: April 01, 2010, 03:40:23 AM »

If it helps, take the opposite as an example - when you solve a polynomial, for example x(x-2)(x+5)=0 , then it would be arithmetically correct to divide by any of the factors eg. 0 = x(x-2) could be considered equivalent and logical after dividing through by (x+5). But you'll have gotten rid of a solution, and thus altered the formula, and by carrying on further, you'll eventually end up with 1=0. The point is that wierd things happen at zero, even though they seem to make sense-you're essentially modifying the equation in a geometric sense, and if zero is the 'pivot', it's difficult to realize when the result becomes illogical.

59

Off Topic / Divide by zero

« on: March 31, 2010, 03:49:46 AM »

That's right - the biggest trap in these proofs is often that people assume that (x^2)/x = x.

60

Off Topic / Divide by zero

« on: March 30, 2010, 02:32:15 PM »

Okay, so you're saying dividing by zero results in the entire real number set?