Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Hey there all, I'd like to try and make a program that simulates 2D celestial collision (star with planet, planet with planet, star with star, etc.). Now, I know that something like this is probably impossible to simulate precisely, and if I even wanted to get close I'd have to call in some serious computer-power favors at NSA, but I'm not looking for something I can sell NASA. I'm just looking for an approximation. Could anybody here tell me what I should read up upon, which topics I should become familiar with, what kind of math/physics knowledge I will be needing, different approaches I can try, etc.? Again, I'm not looking for a precise way to simulate a celestial collision. I'm sort of looking for something that is to 'precise celestial collision simulation' what Newtonian Mechanics are to Relativity; not exact, but good enough. Cheers, Gabe How would that be possible, without a sophisticated computer program which computes a 2D object under a 3D abstract? Conecputually, it is very easy to imagine. But computationally, it should be near-impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 should be possible using a FEM (finite element method) Program, of course, there will be resolution issues as computing power and likely your time will be limiting factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 The computing method would need to have quibit references in its data base, after some thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 what? no, no it wouldn't. have you ever done any computational modelling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 I say it would, because of the restrictions of the computational models required. Are you really advocating that everything in spacetime is a one-zero binary digit? What about including Feynmans sum-over-histories theory? Think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 oh ffs tom, i'm talking about what we can actually do with computers as they exist NOW. and i seriously doubt that shadow is likely to get hold of a quantum computer much less know what to do with one. i never said the simulation would be very accurate but its the best we can do. now you're just argueing for argueings sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 We have quantum computers now. What makes you think we haven't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 (edited) i know we have quantum computers, well, a handful at anyrate, but they are nowhere near powerful enough to run anything like this sort of simulation and they aren't generally found outside quantum computing research labs. stop putting words in other peoples mouths. EDIT: anyway, this is besides the point, the computational fluid dynamics required to model this would pretty much just cover the navier stokes equations and a fusion model, nothing to require quantum computers. Edited December 19, 2008 by insane_alien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 i know we have quantum computers, well, a handful at anyrate, but they are nowhere near powerful enough to run anything like this sort of simulation and they aren't generally found outside quantum computing research labs. stop putting words in other peoples mouths. EDIT: anyway, this is besides the point, the computational fluid dynamics required to model this would pretty much just cover the navier stokes equations and a fusion model, nothing to require quantum computers. Oh really, that's not what you said initially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 i seriously doubt that shadow is likely to get hold of a quantum computer much less know what to do with one. you mean that^? at no point did i say that quantum computers did not exist. i just said that shadow wouldn't be able to lay his hands on one. its not as if you can get 10 for a penny at the corner store now is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 As they exist now, you said. They do exist now, and we can make calculations we couldn't make previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 yes, and as they exist now quantum computers would be about as useful as a block of cheese in this scenario. 1/ the OP does not have access to them, an analogy would be petawatt lasers, yes they exist but not very many people will be able to waltz up to the guys and get some free time with it. 2/ They(quantum computers since you like making up bits where there is even a shred of vagueness) are not powerful enough to run a simulation like this within the life span of the device. they are the quantum equivalent of a couple of transistors wired together. yes, they can perform a few small functions but are ultimately just proof of concept devices. 3/ utterly irrelevant to the OP. Pulling this thread back on topic, you might want to google Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) for this. and its going to require a fair bit of processing power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 19, 2008 Author Share Posted December 19, 2008 Actually, why don't you learn a bit about them, before making these unsupportive claims.. ...Oh, Dejavu... How many times will i need to contemplate these reports, before i just give up on your asses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 go to wikipedia, search, 'quantum computers' look to the references section. they haven't built quantum computers past 12 or so qubits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 As they exist now, you said. They do exist now, and we can make calculations we couldn't make previously. Actually, why don't you learn a bit about them, before making these unsupportive claims.. Tom, you are the one making unsupported claims. Yes, quantum computers do exist today. Why, they are even capable of factoring numbers. If the number is 15, that is. One company, D-Wave Systems, claims to have built a quantum computer that can solve sudoku puzzles. Many key quantum computing theorists rejected that claim (here, here, and here). That was last year's news. Where is D-Wave now? From the Dwave presentation at SC08 (Supercomputer conference), they indicated that the current 128 qubit adiabatic quantum computer has sub-PC performance but they project by next year to reach that level with whatever number of qubits are operational then. Tom: A challenge: Find a commercially available (or even a one-off in a research lab) quantum computer that exists today that can solve anything but toy problems and do so faster than a PC one can buy at any local computer store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 and i seriously doubt that shadow is likely to get hold of a quantum computer much less know what to do with one. Actually, I think I have one in the backyard that came with a manual...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 would you mind passing it on to the researchers then? when they built theirs it didn't magically appear like it was supposed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Actually, I was thinking of giving it as a Christmas present to my little brother, since I just can't think of a present for him...but I'll go through my receipts and see if I can find the place where I purchased it, something's telling me eBay.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Vose Posted December 20, 2008 Author Share Posted December 20, 2008 Only i never said that we had any that could beat the worlds most fastest computer deriving relativistic equations, or one that can model the universe precisely to superpositing laws. I did however say we had them, and we can calculate the first (or something like it) 15 prime numbers, using methods that normal computers cannot do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 which was completely irrelevant to the discussion, their use wouldn't even be considered in such a simulation yet you claimed it would be required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now