[x3d-public] Visualizing Math in X3D

Sun Jun 7 13:13:59 PDT 2020

Limited to [0,1]?  I’ll check the docs.

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 3:10 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Not trying to change the number of points yet. Thanks for the info.
>
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 7:56 AM Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>    - What people don’t understand is I’m moving every vertex in the mesh
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey John, vrml and x3d hid that one in the hanim Displacer node.
>>
>> If you can’t do a morph you need with that, please tell. Just don’t try
>> to change the number of points.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:55 AM
>> *To: *X3D Graphics public mailing list <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>> *Subject: *[x3d-public] Visualizing Math in X3D
>>
>>
>>
>> Don, I am just trying to make the standard better for visualizing
>> mathematical stuff,   I pretty much majored in mathematical visualization
>> in college.   There’s a lot of stuff in the standard for visualizing
>> physics, both rigid body and particle systems.   Instead of applying math
>> to physics, I am trying to apply physics to math.
>>
>>
>>
>> I realize that visualizing math does not really have a vocal champion in
>> the X3D community, perhaps Andy Yeh is still around.
>>
>>
>>
>> I imagine because Mathematica made great strides in the math community.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mathematica still requires a Pro edition running on the cloud to even
>> attempt my surfaces.   In X3D, they pop right up, even multiple
>> “transparent” animated objects. Yay X3D!
>>
>>
>>
>> PlayCanvas has a *very* slow start up compared to X3D.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to continue using X3D over PlayCanvas and others.  The key
>> remains don’t use the network for mesh, positions, or normals, generate
>> them on the web client.   My knowledge of geometry shaders indicates I
>> still need to compute a grid on a sphere, and the geometry shader can
>> enhance that.
>>
>>
>>
>> That is why I am seeking to have the browser generate the mesh for at
>> least one topology, let’s call it a sphere, but it’s the topology of the
>> equation that matters.   I can already position and compute normals of the
>> surfaces.  I could probably compute a mesh as sphere topology in an
>> initialize method if that’s still allowed.  I am not sure about X_ITE.   I
>> do not want to generate coordinates in X3D nodes.   Shaders are fine for
>> that.   I am not sure I can confidently generate a mesh without defects.
>>
>>
>>
>> Low bandwidth (think 4G LTE) is preferred.
>>
>>
>>
>> But you can see my Frustration compared to Mathematica users who just
>> type in a small set of equations.  Not my lucky day.
>>
>>
>>
>> I do not want geometry or perfect math in X3D.   I want a topological
>> 0-hole enclosed surface, subdivided to adequate resolution.
>>
>>
>>
>> I will look further into primitive quality.
>>
>>
>>
>> I will see if my graphics card supports raytracing.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 1:37 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Here’s the best looking version of what I like to do:
>>
>>
>>
>> https://playcanv.as/p/wQgQBgkE/
>>
>>
>>
>> Ideally, I could send a math equation in MathML by putting MathML into
>> the geometry node, and PBR or material like glass or diamond
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 1:22 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Previous subject:  morphing comparison in X3D and glTF:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2017-December/008037.html
>>
>>
>>
>> I would say morphing is doable in X3DOM, but perhaps not other browsers.
>>   The most conformant approach would probably be an IFS where the position
>> and normal are computed in a shader and the mesh is computed in user code,
>> or provided statically.
>>
>>
>>
>> My question becomes,  Why can’t we provide at least provide for common
>> topologies?  1 surface and 0 edges (sphere), 2 surface (cone), 3 surface
>> (cylinder), 1 surface and one hole(torus), and consider a higher number of
>> holes and surfaces.   I think we have a isocahedron at least...but very
>> slow to open.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems like I should be using blender to create X3D.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 12:33 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What people don’t understand is I’m moving every vertex in the mesh with
>> respect to the mesh.   Kind of like particle physics or morphing would be a
>> better description.   I have example videos.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 11:01 PM J. Scheurich <mufti11 at web.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > 1.  User provides a mesh. I have done this before.  It is too slow for
>> > a 100x100 IFS (20000 polygons I think).
>> It depend on your graphics card and driver.
>> For the rasberry PI and some other systems i meshured the performace in
>> 3000 Polygon-Steps
>> (1 NURBS-Object with uv/Tessellation 0)
>>
>> https://wdune.ourproject.org/docs/usage_docs/white_dune_rasberry_pi.odp
>>
>> (in german but page 5 is a readable table).
>> A raspberry PI (shared Memory graphics card) can do 30000 polygons, a
>> Intel HD 3000 shared
>> memory graphics card (this is a common card on older "office"-laptops)
>> can do 33000 polygons.
>> There are very much faster graphic cards on "game laptops"....
>> The fastest graphics card on this list is a very slow (processor)
>> Mac-book....
>>
>> The only systems that are not able to do 20000 polygons are a 8 year old
>> netbook and a
>> ARM chromebook without a 3D driver.
>>
>> so long
>> MUFTI
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> x3d-public mailing list
>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20200607/50cc9e53/attachment-0001.html>