Anonymous user
Talk:Brownian tree: Difference between revisions
m
added a section header to the 1st topic (this will also put the TOC at the top), fixed the section headers.
(→Example Images: new section) |
m (added a section header to the 1st topic (this will also put the TOC at the top), fixed the section headers.) |
||
Line 1:
== ''Collide'' isn't defined ==
Note that "collide" is not defined. In one implementation "collide" means that the particle lands on a fixed particle (and then its previous position is used). In another implementation (mine), "collide" means that the particle reaches a position adjacent to a fixed particle. I do not know if this ambiguity matters, but I thought I would mention it. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 11:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
: It's interesting, but I don't think it matters; there are enough differences between languages that a retrace step in the algorithm doesn't seem important. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 16:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Line 7 ⟶ 9:
::: Yes, I also observed that minute changes can really effect the look of the brownian tree. I was experimenting with the maximum field (with the REXX program) that I could view (in a DOS prompt screen under Windows) and tried various densities (expressed as a percentage), and it appeared that about 10% -->25% ''looked'' about right (as far as esthetically looking brownian trees go). To quote an old saw, ''I can't define what a brownian tree should like like, but I know one when I see one''. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 20:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
==
Originally the D entry derived from the C entry. And later some other language entries have derived from the C/D entries. But the I think the C and C-derived entries don't respect the rules well (it moves already set particles, it doesn't always attach a particle if one of its Moore neighborhood cells is set), so I have rewritten the D entry. I think this D entry is closer to the literature value (1.71) of the resulting fractal dimension of DLA process. The fractal dimension is now lower than the C version (so the resulting tree is less dense), because the attach probability is higher, this causes a faster dendrite growth.--[[User:Bearophile|Bearophile]] 23:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
==
After implementing and experimenting a while, I just thought about a restriction I placed on the movement of the particles (I called them dust motes).
| |||