Yes, relative to the time that it gets "drawn".
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > it has a relative rather than an absolute address - > > > On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Pall Thayer wrote: > > James, some of what you say is correct but, as I understand it, a voxel >> generally doesn't "own" a particular place in a construction. It's >> placement >> is dependent on when it gets drawn within the construction of the whole. >> So, >> time is of the essence... so to speak. >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:22 PM, James Morris <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 08:10:04 -0800 >> Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On 03/12/13 08:00 AM, James Morris wrote: >> > >> On Dec 3, 2013 2:27 PM, "Pall Thayer" <[email protected] >> > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > Volume = space = time, no? >> > >> >> > > >> > > no I wouldn't say so. >> > >> > In spacetime it is. >> > >> >> The pixel has physical material form, as in the thing in your >> LCD/Plasma/CRT screen - or a direct correlation with a physical >> material thing. But a voxel does not have a direct physical >> correlation. There is no display device with a three >> dimensional resolution, such as 1024x768x640 (ie 3D SVGA). >> >> The voxel is only an abstraction and is only 3D in the sense >> that all >> the data surrounding it ends up projected onto a two dimensional >> plane >> causing it to appear to be a scene existing in 3 dimensions. >> Time is >> not a necessary ingredient... >> >> Time is only required when if the observer is to have a role in >> that >> scene ie a 3d 1st person game vs say, scientific imaging >> software >> where interaction is not time based and responding... difficult >> to >> think of concrete example.. I'm thinking programs typed in from >> magazines that played with basic 3D graphics. There was no time >> in >> them. >> >> That's why I say no space != time, but to be honest I'm not >> entirely >> convinced myself. The other part of the argument though (there's >> probably some form of criticism easily applied to this) is it >> not rather >> arbitrary to insist a voxel is time based but a pixel is not? >> >> vaguely related links: >> >> http://www.tested.com/tech/gaming/451611-bringing-back- >> voxel-starforge-cube >> -world-and-return-graphical-style/ >> >> http://imgur.com/gallery/Rs9kJ2D >> >> >> james. >> >> >> >> > And I mean in theory any human artwork not on a 1970s American >> deep >> > space probe will fall into the sun in a few billion years. >> > >> > But this does seem more like spimes than voxels: >> > >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spime >> > >> > >> we're not talking about milk here are we? >> > >> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_f9BII36vI >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > NetBehaviour mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ***************************** >> Pall Thayer >> artist >> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org >> ***************************** >> >> >> > == > email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ > web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552 > music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/ > current text http://www.alansondheim.org/sg.txt > == > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > -- ***************************** Pall Thayer artist http://pallthayer.dyndns.org *****************************
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
