On 2/2/07, Sebastian Hoffmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 10:15:19PM -0800, Ken Taylor wrote: > > > yeah - but my tests of the position sensitivity are quite scary for > > > anything u want > > > to be accurate or repeatable and for mission critical stuff. > > > > But would this kind of experiment be reproducable in the real world, even > > with super-precision equipment? > > How scary *is* it actually? After which time does the simulation start to > diverge visibly? And, if you happen to be in a mood for tinkering, what for time, with the python-ode example, i did not see much diversion until about 8000. for a spatial displacement 10m was enough. f > happens if you update the second simulation with data from the first > simulation every $time?
to me, the scary thing is that people tend to assume that a computer simulation, programmed with high precision and all, is going to be accurate and reliable. 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. chris > > Liebe Grüße, > Sebastian Hoffmann > -- > "Glücklich zu sein ist oberste Bürgerpflicht." > -- Paranoia, West End Games > "Oh, look at the time, 1984 already." > -- Daria (MTV) > > _______________________________________________ > 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
