Hi! More than 10 years have passed since the creation of the simulation, to my surprise, the video is still popular. I will try to briefly answer the questions that might arise. First of all, I've also made N-Body simulation, you can find it on my GitHub: github.com/DrA1ex/JS_ParticleSystem/blob/main/README.md#n-body-simulation About Simulation in the video: The simulation simulation is simplified, it's not an N-Body (each particle interacts with each other). All calculations been made for one point, which is controlled by the mouse. In order to implement precise calculation of physics, it will be necessary to do optimizations (e.g. clustering of points), otherwise the performance will be so much lower (the complexity of calculations instead of O(N) will be O(N^2)), but even with optimizations it will not be possible to achieve a significant increase in performance, since for a precise gravity calculation will need to calculate the interaction of each point with each other. For 1 thousand points, this will be up to 1 million operations. In my simplified version, 1 million points requires 1 million operations. You can try GPU (best for Desktop) in-browser simulation via WebGL: - 500,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=500000 - 1,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=1000000 - 2,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=2000000 - 4,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=4000000 My MacBook Pro 16 can simulate ~2,500,000 in 60fps Or you can try CPU (best for mobile) simulation via HTML5 Canvas: - 100,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=300000 - 500,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=500000 - 1,00,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=1000000 My IPhone 11 Pro can simulate ~600,000 in 60 fps At this moment I've made 3 main versions: - DirectX 9 (you see it in the video) version uses CPU for physics calculation, uses AVX vectorization for speedup. Points are drawn through the billboard technique (for texture mapping). Maximum number of points in real-time: about 1 million. - DirectX 10 version uses GPU for physics calculation. It's rendered through geometry shaders (a polygon is created from a point). The calculations located in shader, and results of iteration are dumpred into memory via the StreamOut technique. Maximum number of points in real-time: about 10 million. - WebGL 2.0 version uses GPU for physics calculation. Used Transform Feedback technique for GPGPU physics calculation. Number of points in real-time: about 5 million (maybe more). So what about source? - DirectX 9 version: github.com/DrA1ex/ParticleSystem - DirectX 10 version: github.com/DrA1ex/D3D10_ParticleSystem - Windows Forms version: github.com/DrA1ex/GDI_ParticlesSystem - JavaScript version: github.com/DrA1ex/JS_ParticleSystem - WebGL version: github.com/DrA1ex/WebGL_ParticleSystem I used DirectX for rendering, but the implementation can be done on any engine: OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, even HTML5. I choose DirectX because 10 years ago there were more manuals about DirectX on the Internet. I'm also thinking about implementing a gravity simulation in WebGL (JavaScript or WASM), but a precice N-Body simulation with calculation optimization and of course with source code. So tell me, do you interested in such a simulation?
Oh man, not even in 720p could The compression algorithm handle, but it is not really weird. “Noise” like this require bandwidth to be rendered properly, and the compression algorithm is trying the hardest to keep the bandwidth down. Conflicting interests to say the least.
*This is what the Universe is doing. To us it's billions of years, at this scale it's 6 minutes.* *We are currently in the expansion period of this undulating phenomenon.*
You still conserve angular momentum when you have backwards rotation from the total momentum if other particles have extra angular momentum in the opposite direction to cancel it out
@@monkeyman5513 well, true, but it doesn’t seem to be the case here. If you look at 3:10 all the particles are rotating counterclockwise, and unless a few of them rotate clockwise at very high speeds the angular momentum isn’t conserved. Btw, the initial angular momentum seems to be zero.
What this animation is modelling? Gravitation itself causes the mass focusing in the the gravity center. What is causing the rotation of mass, repeated many times asymetric explosions, the changes of the center of gravity in the space ? Stary
Good job man!!!! Its beautiful, the only physics is the newtons gravity law? Do you apply any external force? Can you explain it to me or share a resource? I want to do something similar. Thank you!!!
Well, you can't really simulate a Big Bang in an euclidian space. Besides, plenty of stuff in the universe goes into a very close space and explodes after some time.
Fascinating. I kept waiting for it to form a galaxy. I wonder why it can collapse to a near sphere then burst out again? Simple rules can lead to complex behavior.
J Dahllquist It bursts out because of momentum reservation: One of the partical gets so close to the overall origin of gravitation, that it gets flung at a huge velocity, resulting in the movement of the other particals.
it doesn't. This is from a website where when you hold left click you attract the particels when you hold right click you repell them. The bursting out is just the guy pressing the rght mouse button. You won't get that type of behaviour just out of a purelly attractional force. Only if a particle gets acceleated really fast to the center of mass and gets sling-shot outwards, but not a bulk of the cloud bursting.
I downloaded the CUDA SDK and the samples. After installing it, I was able to play with some of the demos and they are great! I have VS 12 and it is having a tough time loading the demo programs. The CUDA docs say that the samples are compatible with VS 8 and 10. Needless to say, I was unsuccessful at compiling them. My goal is to be able to animate an n-body simulation in 2-d w/o collision detection. Say, 100000 little circles and perhaps a planetoid for kicks.
Just stumbled upon this video and it’s pretty cool. I understand the GPU aspect of improving runtimes but what other approximations did you make? Did you use the fast multipole method to speed up the approximation?
Hi, again) Do you use 3D space in this program? And do you use such parameters as mass of particles? Do this program compute force for all particles?(I mean the force with which each particle interacts with all 499 999 other) Because I can't get such performance in my program, though I'm using multithreading.
+Nazar Didkovskyy, привет. Это не N-Body симуляция, каждая частица взаимодействует только с одной. К тому же z-координата фиксирована и не рассчитывается.
Hello Nazar. I just saw this video and your comment, and once encountered a similar problem, but with Flocking simulation. What I've learned was that you don't really need to go over all the other entities in your world to get them collide successfully. You can simply either make a grid model on which you can detect if the neighbor positions (sells) are empty, or not for every object. OR you can do a QuadTree which will increase the performance drastically. I've never tried a QuadTree, tho.
great resources :) simple question, imagining you just have 3 particles.. does calculation use same location/vel/accl of each particle on beginning of each frame to calc (using newton f=m1*m2/D^2) or something more exotic ?
you can just use Newton's law as that's complex enough for a numerical solver. For the case of 3 particles, each particle would have a force vector in 2 directions. From that, you numerically integrate the summed forces which would result in position. For say, particle 1, we can simulate its acceleration (ẍ) as a function of its position to the other 2 particles (x1, x2, x3) as per Newton's law, f_i = m_i * ẍ_i = m_i * m_j / x_i ^ 2 ( where f_i is the force acted on the ith particle to the jth particle). The math would be something like this: f1 = m1 * ẍ1 = m1 * m2 / x2^2 f2 = m1 * ẍ1 = m1 * m3/ x3^2 (f1 + f2)/m1 = ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2 From this, you can probably tell a pattern that the other 2 particles would follow a similar procedure. In total we would have (assuming G = 1) : ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2 ẍ2 = m1/x1^2 + m3/x3^2 ẍ3 = m1/x1^2 + m2/x2^2 This is a fully defined system of differential equations which can now be numerically integrated with respect to time by a computer, giving us the positions of x1, x2, x3 which can be plotted with time and animated. You would, of course need the initial conditions for x and ẋ. Extending this to 500,000 particles would result in a system of 500,000 differential equations, which can really only be solved if you do some further optimization (and probably will need a supercomputer) which I'm not too familiar with. UPDATE: So it seems that the way this video works is that the particles are following the user's mouse. That's the same thing as here, with the difference being that your mouse would define the initial position coordinates of a very, very big mass. This video is NOT an N-body, so each particle is not being attracted to the other. Each particle is very small (pretty much 0 mass) and ONLY being attracted to the mouse. This greatly simplifies the calculations. Still, it's kinda cool to see everything coalesce into a sphere given enough time (which is why planets are round).
@@aadiduggal1860 thanks for confirming :) I think you got typo on first x1 equation: I think instead of: ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m1/x1^2 should be ? ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2
I'm not sure what the deal is, but my replies keep getting deleted. Anyways... I installed the CUDA SDK, and was able to run the demos. They are great, and close to what I want to accomplish. My goal is to make a 2d Nbody sim with 50-100k particles. Pretty much, just for the eye-candy. I have VS 12, and the CUDA samples were made in VS 8 and 10. Needless to say, I was unable to compile the samples (yet). I think I need to set the Path, referencing the CUDA's libraries, includes, etc.
I sent a reply earlier this week. Not sure what happened. Anyways, lol, yes, I’ve been searching for some years, but only every 3 to 4 months. In particular, I’m searching for an n-body simulation that takes advantage of today’s GPU’s. I would like to find one that I can modify and recompile. I’ve yet to find one, even the original source from this video. I tried your recommendations. I used the compiler of their choice, but no go. I’m real frustrated.
I've been searching on and off for some years for someone to publish a simple gravity simulation that uses DirectX. I think your's is the best I've found yet! I've been tinkering around with your code. I was trying to see if I can convert it into a particle simulation whereby each particle is attracted to all others. I've yet to figure it out. Can you please give me some insight on how I might go about doing this?
Outstanding! How beautiful our big bang must have been (or still is) on that unthinkable scale. How many times was this Galaxy born and formed spectacular existences in the process? I wonder what happens in this simulation, if the particles didn't enter the screen when exiting it on the other side. If they just kept going... I am trying to do this with python, numpy and pygame, but I struggle so hard to maintain an acceptable fps with many particles. And that means just 500 for me...
there seems to be no collision, so they pass through the centre of gravity and their inertia caries them forward. untill they slow down due to the gravity again and go towards the centre
I am just trying to implement the Einstein's gravity. Later I dream to make a little atom. At the end I want to create a world with animals having artificial intelligence brains.
No, we would have to know all the physics rules and equations, but for now we don't know very much about our universe. Including dark energy, antimatter, and other elementary particles that we yet have to discover
Hi!
More than 10 years have passed since the creation of the simulation, to my surprise, the video is still popular. I will try to briefly answer the questions that might arise.
First of all, I've also made N-Body simulation, you can find it on my GitHub: github.com/DrA1ex/JS_ParticleSystem/blob/main/README.md#n-body-simulation
About Simulation in the video:
The simulation simulation is simplified, it's not an N-Body (each particle interacts with each other). All calculations been made for one point, which is controlled by the mouse. In order to implement precise calculation of physics, it will be necessary to do optimizations (e.g. clustering of points), otherwise the performance will be so much lower (the complexity of calculations instead of O(N) will be O(N^2)), but even with optimizations it will not be possible to achieve a significant increase in performance, since for a precise gravity calculation will need to calculate the interaction of each point with each other. For 1 thousand points, this will be up to 1 million operations. In my simplified version, 1 million points requires 1 million operations.
You can try GPU (best for Desktop) in-browser simulation via WebGL:
- 500,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=500000
- 1,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=1000000
- 2,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=2000000
- 4,000,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/WebGL_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=4000000
My MacBook Pro 16 can simulate ~2,500,000 in 60fps
Or you can try CPU (best for mobile) simulation via HTML5 Canvas:
- 100,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=300000
- 500,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=500000
- 1,00,000 particles: dra1ex.github.io/JS_ParticleSystem/?particle_count=1000000
My IPhone 11 Pro can simulate ~600,000 in 60 fps
At this moment I've made 3 main versions:
- DirectX 9 (you see it in the video) version uses CPU for physics calculation, uses AVX vectorization for speedup. Points are drawn through the billboard technique (for texture mapping). Maximum number of points in real-time: about 1 million.
- DirectX 10 version uses GPU for physics calculation. It's rendered through geometry shaders (a polygon is created from a point). The calculations located in shader, and results of iteration are dumpred into memory via the StreamOut technique. Maximum number of points in real-time: about 10 million.
- WebGL 2.0 version uses GPU for physics calculation. Used Transform Feedback technique for GPGPU physics calculation. Number of points in real-time: about 5 million (maybe more).
So what about source?
- DirectX 9 version: github.com/DrA1ex/ParticleSystem
- DirectX 10 version: github.com/DrA1ex/D3D10_ParticleSystem
- Windows Forms version: github.com/DrA1ex/GDI_ParticlesSystem
- JavaScript version: github.com/DrA1ex/JS_ParticleSystem
- WebGL version: github.com/DrA1ex/WebGL_ParticleSystem
I used DirectX for rendering, but the implementation can be done on any engine: OpenGL, Vulkan, Metal, even HTML5. I choose DirectX because 10 years ago there were more manuals about DirectX on the Internet.
I'm also thinking about implementing a gravity simulation in WebGL (JavaScript or WASM), but a precice N-Body simulation with calculation optimization and of course with source code. So tell me, do you interested in such a simulation?
wow playing with this is really mesmorizing. looks very nice !
great work
What happened at 0:48 ?
Like a description of star birth, star death by super nova, black hole and void formation.
yes for Precise N-Body Simulation!!! good work
The youtube compression algorithm REALLY doesn't like this
Oh man, not even in 720p could The compression algorithm handle, but it is not really weird. “Noise” like this require bandwidth to be rendered properly, and the compression algorithm is trying the hardest to keep the bandwidth down. Conflicting interests to say the least.
@@roygalaasen Upscaled to 4k could probably handle it :D
@@m.sierra5258 double/triple the bitrate at 720 and it would look fine
Need to upload it to Vimeo. They have much higher bitrates if your connection can handle it.
TRUE
I was changing the simulation parameters while recording video
you should not, instead you d better create many simulations with different params and compare but still amazing work, dud
Edge artifacts? Looks like the particles can wrap?
This is why I love UA-cam, because of videos and people like this! Thanks for all the links!
Nice bit code appears to be 2d forces only. Also would be nice to see without infinite walls bounce of particles.
*This is what the Universe is doing. To us it's billions of years, at this scale it's 6 minutes.*
*We are currently in the expansion period of this undulating phenomenon.*
the nightmare for compression algorithm ^^
"What are you watching son?"
Chaos.
new xbox screensaver just dropped, looks awesome.
edit: OLD xbox screensaver rediscovered, looks awesome.
Nice looking simulation. But it doesn't seem to conserve angular momentum. At one point all particles were rotating in the same direction.
You still conserve angular momentum when you have backwards rotation from the total momentum if other particles have extra angular momentum in the opposite direction to cancel it out
@@monkeyman5513 well, true, but it doesn’t seem to be the case here. If you look at 3:10 all the particles are rotating counterclockwise, and unless a few of them rotate clockwise at very high speeds the angular momentum isn’t conserved. Btw, the initial angular momentum seems to be zero.
This is so rad man. Cool of you to share the code!!
What CPU are you running? Intel i81 @ 50GHz?
He is using his GPU. its magnitudes faster than that
@@samb7291 The description says it's using an AVX particle system, so presumably it's running on the CPU.
Beautiful simulation
this video has been blessed by the algorithm
After 10 years, algorithm finally bring me here
What this animation is modelling? Gravitation itself causes the mass focusing in the the gravity center. What is causing the rotation of mass, repeated many times asymetric explosions, the changes of the center of gravity in the space ?
Stary
It depends on what particles you're using and many other variables.
Good job man!!!! Its beautiful, the only physics is the newtons gravity law? Do you apply any external force? Can you explain it to me or share a resource? I want to do something similar. Thank you!!!
Well that’s the only force you’d need. I’m guessing there ain’t any collisions based on how it behaves?
Thank you for sharing the source code!
We have just witnessed a star's life from beggining to the end.
What do you mean?
I would say it represents Universe, with Big Bang and stuff like that
Where was this big bang? I don't really see it here.
TheFarciarz777 When it all goes into one point, then everything explodes and new Universe created.
Well, you can't really simulate a Big Bang in an euclidian space. Besides, plenty of stuff in the universe goes into a very close space and explodes after some time.
Mesmerising
Like a description of star birth, star death by super nova, black hole and void formation.
Это просто космос!
I'm reading the source code and I just got to the AVX part. Man, it's going to be a long night.
Edit: fuck it, I checking out an older commit.
lol nothing like seeing a random video like this bob to the surface of youtube and getting sucked in. :)
*"when the center of gravity is literally the center of your screen"*
Kinda looks like what i imagine the Universe to be like
Fascinating. I kept waiting for it to form a galaxy. I wonder why it can collapse to a near sphere then burst out again? Simple rules can lead to complex behavior.
J Dahllquist It bursts out because of momentum reservation: One of the partical gets so close to the overall origin of gravitation, that it gets flung at a huge velocity, resulting in the movement of the other particals.
J Dahllquist Looks like particles doesn't have collision.
it doesn't. This is from a website where when you hold left click you attract the particels when you hold right click you repell them. The bursting out is just the guy pressing the rght mouse button. You won't get that type of behaviour just out of a purelly attractional force. Only if a particle gets acceleated really fast to the center of mass and gets sling-shot outwards, but not a bulk of the cloud bursting.
@@Scelenaarwen Not true. Every head of a supernova?
I downloaded the CUDA SDK and the samples. After installing it, I was able to play with some of the demos and they are great! I have VS 12 and it is having a tough time loading the demo programs. The CUDA docs say that the samples are compatible with VS 8 and 10. Needless to say, I was unsuccessful at compiling them. My goal is to be able to animate an n-body simulation in 2-d w/o collision detection. Say, 100000 little circles and perhaps a planetoid for kicks.
GPU version can. ~ 5m (2m pixels at FullHD) particles at 60 fps on GTX670
"And then there was Light"
-God
UA-cam compression raped the quality!
War between gravity and entropy.
This is amazing!
This is beautiful.. I just wish UA-cam didn't hate this video :D
truly amazing
Just stumbled upon this video and it’s pretty cool. I understand the GPU aspect of improving runtimes but what other approximations did you make? Did you use the fast multipole method to speed up the approximation?
Nicely done!
A 10 years old comment !
@@riki_XD A one-day-old reply!
pov: isagi is about to do somethin lit
Darkness cannot exist without light and light Cannot exist without darkness.
Was inspired to write my own version after watching this video.
Der Weltraum Raumschiff sagte 3 Milliarden Pixel orteten wir Jahr 1988 /1989 auf Planet Erde
Why did it bounce back ?🤔
Can you see any Lagrange points?
Ran it at 15 million, holy shit NICE CODE!
It's CPU only. GPU version can simulate 5 million particles in real time.
It went supernova
Hi, again) Do you use 3D space in this program? And do you use such parameters as mass of particles? Do this program compute force for all particles?(I mean the force with which each particle interacts with all 499 999 other) Because I can't get such performance in my program, though I'm using multithreading.
+Nazar Didkovskyy, привет. Это не N-Body симуляция, каждая частица взаимодействует только с одной. К тому же z-координата фиксирована и не рассчитывается.
Hello Nazar.
I just saw this video and your comment, and once encountered a similar problem, but with Flocking simulation.
What I've learned was that you don't really need to go over all the other entities in your world to get them collide successfully.
You can simply either make a grid model on which you can detect if the neighbor positions (sells) are empty, or not for every object. OR you can do a QuadTree which will increase the performance drastically.
I've never tried a QuadTree, tho.
See multilevel fast multipole method. It reduces the complexity from N^2 to somewhat like NlogN in these kind of situations.
@@patrickthepure woahhh bro really???? that's insane!!
Best film i've ever seen
Do you include the time propagation of gravitaion - i.e. that gravity is propagating with the speed of light, not with infinite speed?
BEAUTIFUL AN AMAZING MOMENT! GLAD I COULD BE A PART OF IT! OOIIOO
Just need some otherworldly music and it's perfect
0:48 What's going on here? Looks weird, like a sudden change in mean impulse.
How are they all together and then all of a sudden shoot apart again?
This is basically gravity on a toroidal plane
this is great to watch once youve studied astrophysics
do the particles collide or just gravitate?
great resources :) simple question, imagining you just have 3 particles.. does calculation use same location/vel/accl of each particle on beginning of each frame to calc (using newton f=m1*m2/D^2) or something more exotic ?
you can just use Newton's law as that's complex enough for a numerical solver. For the case of 3 particles, each particle would have a force vector in 2 directions. From that, you numerically integrate the summed forces which would result in position. For say, particle 1, we can simulate its acceleration (ẍ) as a function of its position to the other 2 particles (x1, x2, x3) as per Newton's law, f_i = m_i * ẍ_i = m_i * m_j / x_i ^ 2 ( where f_i is the force acted on the ith particle to the jth particle). The math would be something like this:
f1 = m1 * ẍ1 = m1 * m2 / x2^2
f2 = m1 * ẍ1 = m1 * m3/ x3^2
(f1 + f2)/m1 = ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2
From this, you can probably tell a pattern that the other 2 particles would follow a similar procedure. In total we would have (assuming G = 1) :
ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2
ẍ2 = m1/x1^2 + m3/x3^2
ẍ3 = m1/x1^2 + m2/x2^2
This is a fully defined system of differential equations which can now be numerically integrated with respect to time by a computer, giving us the positions of x1, x2, x3 which can be plotted with time and animated. You would, of course need the initial conditions for x and ẋ. Extending this to 500,000 particles would result in a system of 500,000 differential equations, which can really only be solved if you do some further optimization (and probably will need a supercomputer) which I'm not too familiar with.
UPDATE: So it seems that the way this video works is that the particles are following the user's mouse. That's the same thing as here, with the difference being that your mouse would define the initial position coordinates of a very, very big mass. This video is NOT an N-body, so each particle is not being attracted to the other. Each particle is very small (pretty much 0 mass) and ONLY being attracted to the mouse. This greatly simplifies the calculations. Still, it's kinda cool to see everything coalesce into a sphere given enough time (which is why planets are round).
@@aadiduggal1860 thanks for confirming :) I think you got typo on first x1 equation:
I think instead of:
ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m1/x1^2
should be ?
ẍ1 = m2/x2^2 + m3/x3^2
@@emanueol yep, thanks for catching that.
...such beauty...
I'm not sure what the deal is, but my replies keep getting deleted. Anyways... I installed the CUDA SDK, and was able to run the demos. They are great, and close to what I want to accomplish. My goal is to make a 2d Nbody sim with 50-100k particles. Pretty much, just for the eye-candy. I have VS 12, and the CUDA samples were made in VS 8 and 10. Needless to say, I was unable to compile the samples (yet). I think I need to set the Path, referencing the CUDA's libraries, includes, etc.
Closed loop universe?
Music?
So cool
Cool simulation! Why did this happen?? 5:19
Very stable formation :D
wonderful
Are they attracting each other, or just the center mass? I'm guessing the latter.
Name of simulator or this software
law?
I sent a reply earlier this week. Not sure what happened. Anyways, lol, yes, I’ve been searching for some years, but only every 3 to 4 months. In particular, I’m searching for an n-body simulation that takes advantage of today’s GPU’s. I would like to find one that I can modify and recompile. I’ve yet to find one, even the original source from this video. I tried your recommendations. I used the compiler of their choice, but no go. I’m real frustrated.
Great simulation ;-)
I don't see any consistent circular motion...
computers this good existed in 2012?
At 2:02, did we just witness a virtual big bang?
RK4? Or Euler? Or something else?
Got really confuse when I thought this was a GR sim.
I've been searching on and off for some years for someone to publish a simple gravity simulation that uses DirectX. I think your's is the best I've found yet! I've been tinkering around with your code. I was trying to see if I can convert it into a particle simulation whereby each particle is attracted to all others. I've yet to figure it out. Can you please give me some insight on how I might go about doing this?
Look up multi body physics and the three body problem perhaps
Wonderful.
Outstanding! How beautiful our big bang must have been (or still is) on that unthinkable scale. How many times was this Galaxy born and formed spectacular existences in the process?
I wonder what happens in this simulation, if the particles didn't enter the screen when exiting it on the other side. If they just kept going...
I am trying to do this with python, numpy and pygame, but I struggle so hard to maintain an acceptable fps with many particles. And that means just 500 for me...
Kane lives in death!
Wonderful!!!
holy... amazing!!! and inspiring
is it attraction to center or fair calculation for every pair of particles?
Attraction to a point (the mouse)
@@Astromath not between particles?
we live in a simulation
Did you used Blender or something like After Effects to make this
no he used opengl
What are the colors corresponding to ?
Why do all the bodies coalesce towards the end of the simulation? I thought they would continue their respective eccentric behavior?
There might be a dissipative term involved
From the comments i assume that the program involves some user input so the guy is probably changing stuff
the animation is beautiful but i still didn't understand how its relate to newton law of gravity
Are particles elastic and bounce agaist each other?
there seems to be no collision, so they pass through the centre of gravity and their inertia caries them forward. untill they slow down due to the gravity again and go towards the centre
0:48 Was that spontaneous?
Do the same simulation using MOND theory.
this is from an app for the apple ipad ( the original)
Gravitation on a toroidal manifold :D
2d or 3d
It looks like there is black hole in there
I am just trying to implement the Einstein's gravity. Later I dream to make a little atom. At the end I want to create a world with animals having artificial intelligence brains.
This is visually nice but clearly do not obey conservation of momentum.
So... The planets in our solar system may very well be remnants from a young Sun's wet farts??
how did you do that?
Thats fucking awesome!
Now we can create our own virtual universes using OpenGL, can't we?
No, we would have to know all the physics rules and equations, but for now we don't know very much about our universe. Including dark energy, antimatter, and other elementary particles that we yet have to discover
Have fun trying to gather the computing resources for that