Re: [vos-d] thought problem 1: physics
On 2/2/07, Benjamin Mesing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Question: will the two images of the two experiments show box2 in the same rest position relative to box1? Why don't we consider floating point precision issues as computers equivalent to Heisenbergs uncertainty principle? :) It does seem like that sometimes, chris Sorry, could help it ;-) Regards Ben ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
Re: [vos-d] thought problem 1: physics
chris wrote: Consider the case when a military simulation is used to generate images that they expect a sensor should see. These images are compared to ground truth images and the result is used to calibrate a sensor - which is then used in a craft or weapon. If there is unknown positional error affecting the simulated image (and most practitioners are unaware of the effect of spatial/positional error on rendered images) then the sensor gets miss-calibrated. If the calibration procedure includes the range where errors like that then it should model the error. (After all, that's the point of calibration.) ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
Re: [vos-d] thought problem 1: physics
Benjamin Mesing wrote: Question: will the two images of the two experiments show box2 in the same rest position relative to box1? Why don't we consider floating point precision issues as computers equivalent to Heisenbergs uncertainty principle? Well, OK not to be pedantic or anything :) but the problem is not uncertain, we know very certainly that it's going to happen, whether we observe it or not. ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
