Shiny new things

I've just released a minipack themed around solid geometry, I created it last night after I practically gave up on a preset i've been working on that MUST go into pack 6... anyway enough of the boring details of its creation. The new pack can be downloaded from one of two places at the moment:

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/720677


I'll add it to the link at the bottom of my sig later.

Enjoy!!

i was blown away by your octahedron, it was freakin awsome
so i go to click the next button
and wouldnt you know it! im in the hospital!

(read: dodechahedron was frickin schweet)

thanks karnov, it always makes my day when someone else enjoys my avs presets.

for convenience of people here at the forums i've made a zip file (took me 3 entire clicks) containing the exe so you don't have to go all of the way to deviantart or deskmod just to get it:

Hey man, that's pretty nice. 👍

Great stuff I like Icosahedron and Dodecahedron the best.
I got this idea when I first seen Golden dodecahedron and it is making a C60 molekule like object in avs but since I failed to make it meaby you could give it a try.

the c60 eh... i think i know that polygon... isn't it a hexacontrahedron with pentagonal and hexagonal faces? or is it the triacontakaidihedron (the icosidodecahedron) with pentagonal and hexagonal faces? (I think that these two shapes are duals?)

Sweet...Don't know shit about Geometry (Only been in there for a few weeks and we have just talked about is two dimensional angles...)

That fifth one...The I word (Too damn big...Stupid scientists, "Just add a few more 'deca's and 'iso's; That'll confuse them!" 🙂) Looks good when you put the Multiplier on Infinite Root. Sure, you lose it in the background but look at all the pwetty colors!

Originally posted by Xion(810)
Too damn big...Stupid scientists, "Just add a few more 'deca's and 'iso's; That'll confuse them!"

When I make some bigger polyhedra I'll use the x-hedron naming convention instead then. ie

dodecahedron = 12-hedron
icosahedron = 20-hedron
triacontakaidihedron = 32-hedron
hectakaiicosihedron = 120-hedron

etc...

Someday...Someday I will make the platonic polytopes and blow you ALL out of the water!

*ahem* Pretty cool jheriko :P

Platonic polytopes in AVS? I assume you mean 3-d projections or slices of regular polytopes. If you want to make the 4-d ones that would be some cool code, if you make the projection code I'd gladly supply the coordinates for the 4d polytopes - in terms of phi naturally. In higher dimesions (5+) though the only polytopes that exist are the analogues of the tetrahedron, cube and octahedron which are pretty easy to get the co-ords for (mostly using 1's and 0's).

I did my first year essay on regular 4d polytopes (polychora), and defined them all in it, I was dead chuffed at the time (now I regret it because I could have done an essay on the maths of AVS instead - it was to simple for year two so I cant use it for this year either 🙁 ). The 24-cell (icosikaitetrachoron) was the hardest to figure out since it has no analog in 3-space and it is self dualling so it can't be derived from the other shapes.

4-d, yes. And I'll be working on them on my own, thankyouverymuch :P
I've done the hypercube already...It's around here somewhere. It'll be coming out in my next pack.

my......f*cking....head....

make them stop.............

4D Projection Code:

Standard: x=(x/w)/(z/w);y=(y/w)/(z/w);

Optimized: z=w/z;w=1/w;x=x*w*z;y=y*w*z;

Originally posted by Atero
I've done the hypercube already.

How did you do it? By using a 4-d version of the shadow matrix onto w=0 with a moving light source, or by doing an orthogonal/perspective 4-d -> 3-d projection and rotating the hypercube? Or is there some hidden third way?

Traced the hypercube (1 superscope, making it uberfast at 58 points), then scaled it so it rotated in a unit hypercube, rotated it around the 6 planes (wx, wy, wz, xy, xz, yz), then projected it into 3D and then into 2D.

I've now completed the 4-simplex, and I'm working on the 4-cross polytope. Pretty easy stuff if you know your point-by-point tracing 🙂

Yeah, I hope you have fun with the 24-cell when you get to it, its an interesting challenge to work some of it out. 😁

That looks like it could be a piece of work...The hypercube was the easiest, you just needed every corner connected to every other adjacent corner. The simplex was fairly easy when you have coordinates plotted out for you. The cross polytope you just need every vertex connected to every other vertex except the one directly opposite. But the 24-cell is going to be a piece of work

I find that the floating s-coordinates of teh 37.314159 point x-cube were incridible easy to manipulate. I mean, with out 36-cell kernals in our ip's we would all have to eat phi.

What a world that would be.

hey, i just thought of a funny pun for total noob AVS'ers

DAMN DIRTY .APES!!!


😞 😞 🙂 🙂 🙂 😁 😁 😛 😛 😁 😁 🙂 🙂 😞 😞

damn i crack my self (and apperntly those smilies) up

Shut up karnov.

I just wanna see someone do that 600-cell...That would be 73h 5h17

"Puns are the lowest form of humour; unless they're yours."
- Gary Larson

That response was just perfect Atero.

Originally posted by Atero

I just wanna see someone do that 600-cell...That would be 73h 5h17

Personally I reckon it would look like a huge mess!!

The easiest co-ords for it involve the golden ratio (unsurprisingly), since all of its cells are icosahedra. You can probably find construction guides on maths websites which base it on the 24-cell and then use the golden ratio to get the rest of the co-ords, thats what I ended up doing for my essay. Another way to do it would be to dual it from the 120 cell.

i feel as if ive been brused off. 😢


(could someone explain to me what 4-d is?)
(i dont get it, and (stupid) people (who dont understand either) trying to explain it to me piss me off)🧟

Okay you have your basic 3 dimensions of space, x, y and z, which are 3 axes all at right angles to each other so that you can vary values of x, y and z without them effecting each other. If you take a foruth axis (w) and place so that it as at a right angle to x, y and z you can define a fourth dimesional space (a 4-space) where you have co-ordinates (w, x, y, z) for all of the possible points. You can define geometry in 4-space in the same way that you do it in a 3-space or 2-space, by using points, lines, polygons and polyhedra as well as all manner curves and surfaces.

You can carry patterns through dimensions as well, so for instance we can define the hypercube from cubes as we define cubes from squares and squares from lines.

Square vertices: (+1,+1)
Cube vertices: (+1,+1,+1)
Hypercube vertices: (+1,+1,+1,+1)

If you wanted to take it further you could define the vertices of 5-cubes or 6-cubes in a similar way.

You can take these higher dimensional co-ordinates and project them onto 2d planes or 3d volumes in the same way that you can project 3d geometry onto a 2d plane.

I wish i could sit down with you guys and a peice of paper

f*cking ASCII sucks to try to communicate with

*sigh* well, thanks for the explanation, i think i get it

The thing that messes me up, is that 4-d space (and lines/shapes) would be impossible to represent in 4 dimensions right?

It's cuase we cant "see" four dimensions, right?

So, any 4-d object you put into a 3-d or 2-d plane is distorted in some sense, right?

So, everything you are doing in 4-d is completley hypothetical.

which brings me to my point, how in the hell do you know you are doing anything right?

(im sure my logic train derailed somewhere there, just point me to where 🙂)

Can someone (atero) please post your "hypercube" so i can come to a more complete understanding of the forth dimension?

TOO MUCH CODE!!!!!!!AHHHHHHHHH!

*falls down and holds his head chanting "Can't sleep, code will eat me..."*

im *almost* as lost as you are buddy-

my mantra is more like "fourth...*twitch*..deminsion?*twitch,twitch*"

Here are a few good pages describing the basics of 4D geometry with further links to things like videos of hypercubes and definitions of some more complex polytopes.

Acually Karnov, you can't even see in 3D. People don't realise that their vision is just 2 2D images which correlate in your mind to create a Psuedo-3D Heightfeild. In fact, some people can't even do that, if they haven't developed that skill or they have a certain eye problem (Like astigmatism, where the eyes have differing aspect ratios, which I have 🙁)

Damn...you beat me to it. I taught you everything you know Zeven 😛 (if it weren't for me YOU wouldn'ta said that in the first place)

Anyway, there's two basic ways to represent 4-d objects. One is using a 3-d cross section. Analogy: Take a cube and stick it in a bowl of water. The part that's on the surface of the water is a cross section. Same way with 4-d. Take a 4-cube and stick it through our 3-d space. The part that's on the 'surface' of our space is the part that we see. The other way is to use a projection (like 3-d to 2-d, just 4-d to 3-d to 2-d).