Many ways to skin a spider
As a natural progression from MD2, I looked into MD3 format and I found a windows program called MD3view done in C++. It was scary. It shows how evil C++ can be if you combine it with windows. It is like taking a mutagen and applying it to the evil beast. I looked at the source and found "DWORD" defined as a data type and when I was done washing my eyes with sulfuric acid, I decided to take a different approach. I got some python scripts for MD3 and used blender import and export. It was clean and quick and UV unwrap, texturing , and changes were a matter of minutes. So rather than redesign the world for every application. I reused all the utility of blender and the versatility of python. It is easy and mainly I just wanted to investigate the way in which it was structured and how the vertex animation was accomplished.
Blender and Google Sketch
There are many templates in Google sketch format that can be easily imported to blender. I created an electrical panel in Inkscape and though it is a good likeness and easy to create it is difficult to export in 3 dimensions.
I have been studying how to create the trisection of an angle using only a compass and straight edge and so I have created a sequence of pictures and methods which I think is legal according to the rules that the compass looses its shape when lifted from the page and ruler is infinitely long. I am a bit confused that it has been proven to be impossible logically from the rules, so unless they are wrong or I am wrong then it is a paradox, so one of us is wrong. It will take some time to get all the steps in a LaTex document suitable for publication, but that seems the only way to prove that it is true. I really don't care if I publish something, but I can't say it is so and thus usable in some respect by all, unless it is accepted that it is true by the Illuminati educational establishment or someone that is recognized as a mathematical authority.
It is odd that another Mohr worked in this area once nearly 400 years ago. He seems to have hung out with some real heavyweights like Spinoza, Newton, Leibniz, Huygens, Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus , and such.
Mitochondrial Eve and Monte Carlo Methods
The title is just something I was thinking and it occurred to me that until they have tested every single person on the planet, they will never know if they all come from the same mitochondrial tree. I also was thinking that some genes could be reversed with no effect if they were palindromes.
I had been planning to make a tree program that grows trees and various other things and this tutorial about plants is really informative. ngplant Making Trees and the second image is a snapshot of the package running and a thing I did in a few seconds of testing. The top image is one that is imported in blender from the examples. It should be very helpful in understanding the relationships. Strangely, I had assumed most of what they discovered about rotation, Fibonacci and basic model organisms. Great fun and useful too. The package assembles easily and uses "scons" and "mercurial".
Mixing math methods
Further refinement of the idea of transporting equations to action, surfaces and demonstrations in blender.
Blender allows python scripts to be transported with the blend file and can produce movies with sound and animation. It is the perfect vehicle for carrying function with data.
The simplest space
The file is a k3d surface file and the image is with conditional boundaries spaces and with surface normals. The file extension is k3ds. I have been working at resolving the sqrt(-1) as it is extended into all mathematics. There is a different perspective to all this that is less contradictory, and allows an easy progression to higher space, but it is like learning math from the ground up in a new way. It doesn't bother me as I switch from language to language all the time in programming and on the net. Sadly, this is the simplest common denominator that I can create and even this is not the whole picture. I have started doing Python in blender to allow things that are only available in other packages like numpy and even gimp or inkscape. The image is of some related surfaces that also have connectivity between them and so this is another dimension and this is just the relationship of three dimensions. I can select surfaces in the 3D space and use them in blender to analyze and comprehend the complex functional space of a signal, gravity, or system.
Name:motey /* Author: motey */ F():(x/y)*(x+y)+ (y/x)*(x+y)+ (x+z)*(x/z)+ (z/x)*(x+z)+ (z/y)*(z+y)+ (y/z)*(y+z)- 15*(cos(x)+ cos(y)+ cos(z)) [x]: -pi , pi [y]: -pi , pi [z]: -pi , pi Cnd: (x^2 + y^2 > 3.14) & ( x+y+z > -3.14) ;
When the matrices are included in this it becomes even more complex and this is the foundational relationship of numerical space or measured space and sets.
It is very complex and the rule sets are complex. I see no way to resolve it to anything less simple, in fact it must be 4 infinities more complex than this just to deal with common perception.
There is quite a bit of overlap in the packages, but it seems that Python is the common denominator which can integrate them all. Perl and CPAN is another, but Perl is a little trickier and somewhat obtuse. Python seems to be structured well enough to be understandable, though it lacks speed. This is where the libraries help.
I suppose I will use the blender template with python to integrate all of the math and graphics. It has 3space and time incorporated in the design and so is closer to the manipulation of S3 in S3 and T2 in T2, but that is as close as 3 infinities, but there seems no better way to deal with it or allow visualization.
G and c fall out as it is applied to charge space and so it gives a coherent expansion of the possibilities for matter from the lowest elements to the combinations of them.
An interesting correlation is the nature of information itself and that relationship to the DNA pair AT and also GC. I could say that a specific temperature that GC is boundary and AT is open and thus the combinations of ATn are the information in the same way that 0s and 1s are the foundation of binary logic.
The TED talk by Michael Shermer is very entertaining and it is an interesting equation that deals with Type 1 and Type 2 errors when Type 2 is fatal. It is worth viewing. It does get to the heart of superstition. I would add that superstition and craziness can be a survival parameter in the same way that randomness can be applied to war games to get advantage. Just because some people are illogical and insane does not mean they are absolutely destined for a Darwin award, and in fact the crazy guy and his wife who hide in a cave could be the founder of a new race if there is a global calamity that makes them selected. It seems that there is an underlying survival mechanism that is explored in the "Mote in God's Eye" and that is the "Crazy Eddie" hypothesis. And the moties is the origin of the pseudonym motey that I often use.
Spider milk and the FungiiLichen
I have analyzed the possible inventions for space and it is possible to construct nearly all the tools and make a coherent system. It lacks one part and so I will focus on that. The transform from a 2D population to a 3D space population would seem to be a long and complicated path, but it seems to me that it is not centuries or years or even days away. If the appropriate relationship can be applied, it is very much like any exponential effect. In the 1700's it was the way west in the US and it was a period of 100 years. In the 1960's it was computers and it was virtually done in 10 years, Internet 5, DNA, AI, genetics, and more.
There is only one last equation that needs to be in place and that is the equivalent of the Maxwell equations that incorporate gravity. I can do all kinds of things with electro-magnetics like NAND, and communication and power. The extension of the EM equations is already in place in the form of various transforms and methods or constructors. So I will take what I have learned from multi-variable calculus, matrices, analysis and tools to identify that one key relationship that allows the design of gravity control systems. E is abundant if you know how to generate and collect it. Complexity is easy to implement now. It is that one single hole in the sphere, topologically speaking.
svn checkout http://ti-warrior.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ ti-warrior-read-only
Somebody came up with the covered wagon, browser, rifle, car, dynamite, and many other things that allowed the extension of influence. If I were to sell a gravity vehicle with capabilities to travel to distant stars, it has the same effect. The life extends and grows in new places and when it finds a solution that allows expansion in a new way there is a period of exponentiation. It isn't that bizarre. So s^20 probably which is about s.2^67 and thus is 67 cycles. What is the cycle? , hard to compute. If I were offered a planet and solar system for myself, if I made the effort to go there, it would seem a reasonable thing to do. In the case of the internet browser netscape, I could get netscape, connect to a network and have access to the entire world. So by comparison, I download a gravity calculation, and have access to the universe. It is just another infinity and I have no idea what it would do to people and nobody does. It is just something that can be done and then it is done. People will try and control it and silly people will continue to buy what is free. Snake oil flows freely in all dimensions.
The larger and more complex a system is, the harder it is to achieve single point control. That is a simple fact of control theory. It is what generally keeps us from being eaten by the parasites that continually seek to be king of the universe. The eigenvectors of gravity, ...... perhaps.
Reimann Robots
I am modifying this for red and black ants and super ants as they exist with multiple queens. I also have a test I wanted to try using Reimann integrals in n-Space. Boids and the blender animation are interesting. The implementation of boids by elsamuko is easy to modify and well programmed. There is an interesting intersect between genotype to phenotype and Reimann as well as swarm behaviour.
Interesting thought, is the internet starting to swarm, and is that what scares the governments so much? I saw some interesting things on emergent government and it seems that it would create a new informal structure. The parametrics are more complex than this, but I can see for myself that people with similar interest are likely to act in the same way, independent of any actual association.
Time enough
I tried to make this clear, but I am afraid it is about as clear as mud.
Time is a ratio and offset to change. I wonder why anyone would consider that things could act instantaneously. I do think that someone suggested that gravity acted instantly. If that were so, one object would be in a new position, the second would respond, and the first would be changed and all of this would happen instantly and so it would find its final relationship without any perception of it. Thus everything would happen at once and as a result, if it were true, and then if perception were dependent on this, it would simply be the ratio of subjective perception to relative change. If there were an infinite transform in any physical process, there would be some very bizarre consequences. Certainly there are gravity waves and even gravitational magnetism, but it seems that FGM is expressed and calculated as a different aspect by others. It is a complex subject and perhaps the relationship of gravity and charge is what makes it seem less confusing to me. F=q(v×B) is a valid transform, but I prefer to analyse from the underlying nature. Certainly V=I·R is generally true, but doesn't express all of what is taking place.
I enjoy all the movies about time travel like "Groundhog Day", "Dr Who" or "Retroactive". I don't consider them as valid portrayals of time-like things, but the concept is interesting to entertain.
The image is a work in progress to express the many logical dimensions of time, space and relationships. Time is different everywhere and in 4 dimensions it is possible to show the interaction of some of the aspects, but there are more logical dimensions to the process than the relative ratio of change. Each thing that is variable with respect to any other adds dimension to the relationships.
Self referential things tend to cause a great deal of confusion for most people. I suppose it is because it incorporates the possibility of infinite recursion. The second appearance of the entry to the rabbit hole in any trip down the rabbit hole is a bad omen.
The relationships are recursive and the relationships of infinites can be resolved. Cantor spent a lot of time with this and he did not resolve it to my satisfaction, though he certainly had some very good ideas.
It seems it takes more time to create illustrations and blog about the subjects than it does to understand and apply them. In this case I am writing a python script that generates the blender image and in this way, I can simply post the python code (blender 2.49) and it can be shared without transferring an entire blender context.
This is the relationship of space as time in a system of multiple reference frames that are actually absolute frames. The time wing is a basic feature of locked velocity systems. This is my interpretation of Maxwell's equations using a different transform. The ΣRδr (∫RΔr) ( I know that is x2/2 , and it is only part of the surface integral and what is of interest is the vector sum of the surface with delta r ) of the distance travelled is the cause of the appearance of gravitational magnetism. This leads to the production of a vortex under many circumstances, due to the fact that it appears to be a force against the line of motion. It would rarely appear or produce much effect, except in cases such as the collapse to a neutron star and would then ( I assume ) produce a noticeable and measurable side effect. Which would be gravitational induction in the direction of accelerated rotation. It is such a small variance under most circumstances that it would be un-noticed. I would guess that the collapse to a black hole would have much the same effect, but that is a much more complicated situation and I will have to do some few equations to calculate the scale of the effect. I don't consider electromagnetic or this to be real forces, just artefacts. I suppose this could account for some of the "dark excuses", but it is so hard to tell, as they have theoretical physics so tangled up, it could cause an AI to have a nervous breakdown.
I am having some problems with scilab ( with OpenGL) and I may have to do some digging in the source, as it contains some interesting tools and methods that I need to apply and don't want to rewrite from scratch.
Math HTML test. probably better as &int (a→b)f(x)/(1+x)δx
Glimpse (gimp) extensions
This one took about 25 seconds to create. Duplicate layer, Oval select, fill, transparent layer, rectangle select, fill, oval, fill gradient, text=8, scale, background, texture fill, layer, motion blur, merge down, save, done.
I never used the scissor select before and I really missed a good tool. As time goes by, I learn new ways to combine methods and this is really useful. You select a point and then others and it follows a path / boundary , best as it can. Strangely this is exactly what I was trying to implement. So they already thought of it, but I wanted to do a little more with it, so I will look at the scissor algorithm a bit.
Getting source and dependencies, then in the files :
sudo apt-get source gimp sudo apt-get build-dep gimp ( modified ) gimp-2.6.7/app/tools/gimpselectionoptions.c gimp-2.6.7/app/tools/gimpselectionoptions.h
I have modified the gimp to glimpse to add some new selection options that allow following paths as vectors and curves, because I needed them for vector space and manifold like selection as layers. The intent is to merge with blender and my OpenGL. Below is a rope topology image that shows a "quick hitch". The integration involves physics of objects as well as the dimensional manipulation of objects in space as dots and flats as well as models and faces. It is like using a grease pencil in 3D in blender, but uses layers to make the separations as integers. So the physics deals with dots or atoms of the rope or surface and integrates the coefficient of friction to determine how the material acts. In this case the quick hitch holds in the direction of the arrow ( where friction is above a specific value ), but collapses when pulled by the other free end.
I am investigating for a way to more easily move images to selections as editable images. Topology is another area where the science needs some serious extension and new ideas.
blender python gimp and dwarf planets
I watched a video by Andrew Price at Blender Guru and that was very well made and extremely informative. While watching, I was thinking about Google street view, OpenGL, astronomy, automatic city builder, Python and gimp scripting. It is possible to combine all these things to automate the extraction of elements of images and data files to get 3D files for games and analysis. It is obvious that eventually all these techniques can be integrated to allow information flow from the various sources.
It represents another level of integration that produces some new insights to the information.
Blender 2.5 has example scripts
import bpy class OBJECT_PT_hello(bpy.types.Panel): bl_label = "Hello World Panel" bl_space_type = "PROPERTIES" bl_region_type = "WINDOW" bl_context = "object" def draw(self, context): layout = self.layout obj = context.object row = layout.row() row.label(text="Hello world!", icon='WORLD_DATA') row = layout.row() row.label(text="Active object is: " + obj.name) row = layout.row() row.prop(obj, "name") bpy.types.register(OBJECT_PT_hello)
blender-2.50a1/release/scripts/templates
The distribution for blender 2.5 has examples included with the distribution. While investigating the available resources this was discovered in references to the weekly developer meetings.
Language that speaks in icons and images. It really seems that somebody has failed to grasp the "BIG" picture. I certainly am having trouble coordinating things and concepts from areas as divergent as sub nuclear structure and life in the universe, but I see the patterns in the tangle. It is a giant tangle of strings that share many common elements. It would be like taking te genetic code in DNA of every organism that ever existed and selecting the coding strand to mix with every other DNA.
DNA is function and data at the same time. In programming the function and data are separated conceptually. It all resolves, but it is such a headache as I have never known before. It has started to abate as the systems collapse and are ordered. It is obvious that it resolves to a single method structure that encompasses all process-data from the field of the smallest particle to the composite structure of the universe.
I am just waiting for my brain to reorganize to the relationships. It is already helping and I see what can and must be done with the structure of data available. It is the dependency tree of the universe. In the same way that life originates from a very simple mechanism, the structure and understanding of the universe progresses from a very simple algorithm. If I use it now it will be as tangled as everything else and all I can do is clean up loose ends and wait for the rotation in the many dimensions to align.
I have a glimpse of what this means and how it extends. It seems that many things that were difficult and impossible to comprehend now become mundane.
Some conclusions I have made, or more precisely resolutions, are now falsified in the new structure. The recursion is dizzying in its observation, but required to resolve the twisty little passages that all look alike. I saw a thing about the slope of the exponent curve at 1 and "e" that was very interesting as it is a concept that I represent as the branch to infinity measurement. Of course it is a first derivative in the technical sense, but I never saw it expressed that way before.
I have some new python scripts that could only be labeled bizarre in their form. It is the script that I use to discover and categorize for the AI. Really interesting, but too much consideration will tangle the resolution, so it waits.
Something odd is happening to the Earth, or there is data that suggests a major natural cycle that has occurred before is about to recur. My guess is that it is some quorum state that happens infrequently. I am going to be watchful. I don't even know why I mention it in this context, but ultimately everything relates to everything else.
Blender object structure
verts = [] faces = [] vec=Vector(1,0,0) verts.extend([vec.x,vec.y,vec.z]) vec=Vector(1,1,0) verts.extend([vec.x,vec.y,vec.z]) vec=Vector(0,1,0) verts.extend([vec.x,vec.y,vec.z]) vec=Vector(0,0,0) verts.extend([vec.x,vec.y,vec.z]) faces.extend([0,1,2,3]) return verts, faces
This python code creates two groups which are vertices and faces. It is not elegant and not intended to be. This creates a single face using four corners and thus constitutes the simplest object that I can create to demonstrate how the interface is used to create more complex objects and models.
verts_loc, faces = add_face() mesh = bpy.data.meshes.new("FaceOfBoe") mesh.add_geometry(int(len(verts_loc) / 3), 0, int(len(faces) / 4)) mesh.verts.foreach_set("co", verts_loc) mesh.faces.foreach_set("verts_raw", faces) mesh.faces.foreach_set("smooth", [False] * len(mesh.faces)) mesh.update() ob_new = bpy.data.objects.new("FaceOfBoe", mesh) scene.objects.link(ob_new) ob_new.selected = True ob_new.location = scene.cursor_location
And an explanation of what the parts do.
verts_loc, faces = add_face() # as above procedure to create the elements mesh = bpy.data.meshes.new("FaceOfBoe") # create object to hold all the data mesh.add_geometry(int(len(verts_loc) / 3), 0, int(len(faces) / 4)) mesh.verts.foreach_set("co", verts_loc) mesh.faces.foreach_set("verts_raw", faces) mesh.faces.foreach_set("smooth", [False] * len(mesh.faces)) #add the items to that structure and set some attributes mesh.update() #bookkeeping ob_new = bpy.data.objects.new("FaceOfBoe", mesh) # create object structure to be placed in scene scene.objects.link(ob_new) #add that to the scene ob_new.selected = True #make it selected when done, optional ob_new.location = scene.cursor_location #it has to go somewhere so the cursor is a logical place Now blender has the data to display and use it.
I could just as well have meta code which interprets "Create a model that has 4 unique points at the corners of a square and add it to a scene". In this way I know what this method is doing and it abstracts the use further. All of the same things happen and it selects the points by its own code and by simply having a meta interface allows me to avoid remembering precisely what face.create.standard.sample,centered actually does. I would still have to create the code in this case, but in a more general case I can use the meta interpreter to select certain aspects which are mutable and apply those variations. I have used this method for 30 years. It was deadly slow in 1980 and is now usable. I would write code at the mock assembly level which was "Set variable owner of the data = 10". It is not ambiguous as the = sign and the first occurrence of "variable" and "set" are reserved. I could use the words "variable" and "set" in the name without conflict. The one thing that I could not do is name a variable with an = sign in it as that is the symbol which terminates name context. I intend to extend this syntax to make it completely unambiguous using unicode symbols to indicate and separate object names, actions and context. ⇒Maximum readability ⇐
By using the variable by name it allows the code to access variables in a way which is not compile time oriented and operations have nothing to do with the CPU.
One of the aspects of using blender or any other software is to get the general framework correct. At the start is a point or vertex which is a spatial position. This can be grouped with another vertex to represent an edge, and then a minimum of three connected edges makes a face. It is basic geometry of forms and space. The way in which the objects are stored accessed and manipulated is in some part determined by the software interface. By using Python, it is possible to determine what actions are available, how they are applied to the primitive elements and then create a procedure that either instantiates or modifies that object.
The dependencies are the ability to understand the geometry and topology of the forms and the ways in which they can be transformed. It also requires an understanding of the syntax and language structure to combine actions on objects so that a desired result is achieved.
There is advantage in having a solid framework to consider the matter. It is useful to see examples of how the interface is applied to achieve certain effects. However, the most important first step is to grasp the basics. When using Python there are basic data types which are common to all programming and some extensions. The primitives of the language and the primitives of the interface are the only way in which a result can be achieved.
The association of methods in programming and object structures in blender makes the entire process more clear and easier to extend. An example might be a list of vertices in a format that is x,y,z as the spatial location. A list. Python has methods that act on lists. An edge can be an association of members of a vertex list and is itself a list. The same holds true of faces. Once the objects become associated in more complex ways, it becomes necessary to understand how those objects are structured as data. Which elements or properties do they contain and what ways can they be manipulated.
It is not necessary to know the detail of how that is implemented and this is the style of object oriented programming. New members can be added to sets and it does not require a recompilation or changes to every reference. Python must handle the data types and methods in a consistent way, else it would no longer be python, but some other snake software. By dissolving the underlying structure and then reassembling it, I hope this makes the use of it simpler and more understandable to a person wanting to start generating results and needing a firm predictable place to start.
Whether you program to create product at the interface level by a series of actions or by a script, the end result is the same. By symbolically representing the underlying complexity it is possible to add another layer of abstraction which hides more of the implementation detail. By clicking add cube, a person is not required to know or care how the result is achieved. There are many levels of use and the level of interface is the most effective. The new interface exposes many more methods in a more intuitive fashion to a novice user and this is good. As a user of earlier versions it is a bump in the road.
Blender 2.5 Python 3 references API
This is the first of many posts on the blender 2.5 with python 3. I am converting scripts and will post the scripts which work with 2.5 alpha2 and mark labels so that if you want to follow the scripts and get ahead of the game on implementing tools for blender 2.5 then this will be my main interest for a while. The code, references and scripts will be in posts with the blender25alpha2 label and so it should be easy to separate and when alpha 3 comes along then I will make a new label for that and remove the old label when they are updated.
There are lots of scripts and each presents an opportunity to learn something. As I stated in an earlier post, I am using meta-meta code generation, but it must end as usable python so that is what I will post.
Here is a link to python API again. I will code some simple demos and post the scripts here as they will all be modular enough so that if names change I can go back to the posts and just update each in turn as blender becomes settled.
I will get to the IRC when I have enough information to ask intelligent questions and keep what I learn here.
The image is of various mutations of a torus. It seems very simple to me, but there probably are some serious dependencies involved in doing this originally and in modifying the code. It uses sin and cos to create a torus. I have done the math to figure out how to step around a circle and step around another circle. If you are making steps to make a circle in segments it would be at sin,cos of an angle from 0- 2π radians. If I were to plot x,y of the angles on a graph and connect the segments then it would be a circle. In this case then we are centering the circles about another circle, which is the big radius. Wikipedia explains it quite well and so I won't labor that, see wiki torus
Having made tori in OpenGl, I have a feel for how to make different shapes by modification of the para-metrics of the object. The image shows three mutations on the form. The knowledge of math and topology is helpful when dealing with this.
The individual parts of the script register the method in the add menu and then is executed from there. This is the place where I would create the necessary moderators for make human and make ant as buttons and a means to add those as objects. Those would require a bit of genotype to phenotype magic, which is contained in the script and does not change because blender changes. So I will separate out the scripts that create the buttons to control the DNA, and the procedure which creates the vertices. I think I will do an animation of the process, which would be a growth from single cell to blastomere and then through the process of differentiation. blender 2.5 has some new tricks and I can take advantage of those to actually grow the organism as it is animated.
The code comes with blender and it should be understood that all of this is a derivative work and is thus GPL, and not to be used for commercial purpose, free to use.
So here it is, and I will reference each post to this so that nobody is fooled that this is anything other than GPL.
# ##### BEGIN GPL LICENSE BLOCK ##### # # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or # modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License # as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 # of the License, or (at your option) any later version. # # This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the # GNU General Public License for more details. # # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License # along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, # Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. # # ##### END GPL LICENSE BLOCK #####
Make human with blender 2.5 is changed and so this is a link to that so I can keep up with the changes there.
Also plenty is going on with blender nation.
Blend the body electric
e=bpy.data.objects["Cube"] print(e.color) print(e.location) print(e.matrix) print("ctrl space for command completion") print(bpy.app.version) from bpy import context f=open("/home/motey/dirbpy.txt","w") for x in dir(bpy): f.write(x+"\n") f.close print("script complete")
This is a script that I am using with blender. Because I am lazy and creative and the interface is subject to change, I am doing what I would do to "discover" the interface and then perform functions against it. It is one or two steps back from actually programming as I define the connection between information and methods and use cases.
By associating a complete description with each shorthand object it is easier to identify and differentiate changes. So long as it is simply a name change then it is as simple click connect in the game controller frame.
Discovery of the interface python commands, search of the source, web sites, code libraries or actually any source. The discovered data is then organized and identified by its type. The use of the information is through meta code and the meta code simply needs to connect with the object that it needs to operate upon. If there is a conflict or missing part then I would be required to determine a new decision algorithm. If I choose simple methods which are not likely to go away, but may have new access methods, I can avoid work later. It is not likely that a vertex could ever be defined without a location and so I am safe in modifying that property. Certainly the names could change from "Cube" or object.location[1], but it would no longer be blender if certain constraints did not exist. If I am also proactive for new features then it can be automatically skipped if it does not exist. It only requires that any method I apply be aware of its absolute dependencies and as such a method cannot be initiated if it does not have its dependency met.
He who laughs last
Is slow witted.
class ObjectButtonsPanel(bpy.types.Panel): bl_space_type = "PROPERTIES" bl_region_type = "WINDOW" bl_context = "object" class OBJECT_PT_pingpong(ObjectButtonsPanel): bl_label = "Ping Pong"
Ira Krakow has been making new videos for Blender 2.5 with Python 3 and the code above is part of an example script. He talks pretty fast and that is fine as I have enough understanding of Python flavors and a grasp of the blender interface, but if you want to learn blender from scratch, don't start here as you will have a stroke trying to keep up. Ira seems to have a very good grasp of the interface, Python and the concepts involved. The tuts are much appreciated.
I had some frustration the first time I decided to do a little object to demonstrate something with an image. It is different enough that it has taken me about 30 minutes to find all the things that I used to use and learn the new associations and relationships.
The interface is smoother and functionality is much greater so that comes with more complexity , which can't be avoided. They are doing a good job and translation of scripts that I use is under way. I did not see a makehuman conversion to python 3, so I will put those on the blender site if nobody else does it before me.
This link is to the Blender 2.5x Python 3.x API and as of 3-18-2010 it is still unstable. This is a great opportunity to integrate all of my tools to a higher level. By designing meta code script that generates the Python it makes it possible to easily convert old scripts and create new scripts to an interface that may change.
Blender 2.5 Python 3.x and Make Human
This is kind of cleanup work. Blender comes with Python 3, which is different and blender 2.5⇒2.6 is different also. Make human has changed and so has make ant. It is a lot of change and so that is fun. In the process I am going back and analyzing how HOX (Homeobox) genes act to make an organism and it is somewhat like the Cube game engine. I can have a python script that generates an organism and correlate how the organism develops. I use a different approach and have volumetric muscles which are objects and the laws of physics determine how the muscles act in a circumstance. By also creating a cellularly modeled neural array that is trained, the entire process proceeds from DNA to model without any intervention, if I get the relationships correct. I am going back over this to make the entire process programmable in English.
The work involves tuning the relationship between a symbolic gene set and the product organism. I always learn some new things when I revisit the techniques and this is a great opportunity to make the process more coherent, and perhaps extensible.
The image is an example of a series of steps applied to a cube. I can do this in my program also, but the interface is designed differently and projected to be coherent with WebGL arrival.
One of the things I wanted to do, is to see if I could recurse everything and have a python script that was a tutorial in blender 2.5 and python 3.0 that would generate a video and blend file that could be played along with the video and the sound generated by a voice generator.
This way it would be easier to explain how antfarmgl and the WebGL interface works.
I may seem that I hop about subjects all the time, but my days are full and I study physics, genetics, mathematics, programming, and chemistry all at the same time and a couple posts every day is like 2 frames of a 14 hour video and they are bound to be different, unless I just sat and stared all day.
People are creating new scripts for gimp every day and blender has interface to svg. In addition I am developing new tricks and each day make the scheme scripts, interfaces, python and overall process more clear and easier to use. Sometimes I am frustrated when I have an idea of some decoration that I want to create for a post and so it isn't perfect, but each day makes it a little less frustrating.
Blender effect is awesome
This link is to a blender 2.5 video demo of indirect lighting effect and that is impressive.
This video by Lawrence Lessig is about fair use.
OPINIONThere is a logical flaw here though. This is the perspective of a lawyer and a person who believes there is a "right" to be enforced. The concept of government is built on a lie. It is a principle of taking from people and then deciding what is right to return to them. The larger the government the more damage it does. I have heard that the big tobacco companies are killing people and I say that this is absurd. Indians developed the concept of smoking without a company to start it. It is not something that companies made happen. Alcohol damages the liver and causes health problems, so does tylenol, antibiotics, ...... Life ends in death. Copyright dependency is not something that companies make happen. they simply cooperate with the process of government, which is to take from people and distribute it to the government. The government wants money and it matters not what the source is, so long as they control it and are paid. Suing people is just another way for the government to pay the people who support them. It is a simple quid pro quo. The lawyers are simply an extension of the government control and the problem is that they have no rights. There is no document that says that government has the right to create a constitution which defines and limits the rights of others. It is without foundation. This is one of those religious things that people will kill you for however.
People get very upset when you challenge ideas that have been planted in their head by induction. The problem with this scam is that it works on almost everybody. When you combine this with religious or genetic fervor, it is an impenetrable cloud of deception. The United States was founded to allow religious freedom and to invade and kill the native population so that Europeans could consume and destroy it.
It may be my perspective since I am part native Indian that I feel this way. It is the concept of ownership that bothers me. It is not really any valid concept at all. It is a statement that a person will find something and after he has seen and fondled it, it becomes theirs for all time. I would guess it is a nesting instinct gone mad and extended to infinity. A disease, like greed where no amount of food will satisfy the hunger and so the locust eats until the world is dead. Since the natives of the Americas had no money, they were poor and could not own their own land, right? The history of man in the last few millennium is conquest and destruction. It is strictly a military occupation and it should not be called anything else. Might makes right is the old dodge.
Systems and nature evolve and I am not one to say that it is right or wrong. The idea of right is a religious one and also centered about ego. Since I do not believe there is such a thing as a singular identity, I find it difficult to extend that concept to say that by physical proximity of objects that they somehow become bound to that entity and assured by some right which extends from god and is thus also absolute.
My opinion is that it is a con, a psychological self justification (impulse) to allow the person to kill whoever they want at any scale to gain whatever they want. Simple greed cloaked in flowery speech. There is no authority that exists which owns anything except that things can be controlled by the act of force. I was using that!, bonk,bonk, you ded.
It is the concept established long ago that I could declare myself king by order of the gods and then kill my way across the world and own it. It is really effective but it is only valid when the scale of warfare is limited to swords and crude weapons. The theory does not extend well and is fraught with implementation detail that makes life hell for all except the conquering worm.
I see it as an evolutionary step however and don't assume things I do not say. Nature is a cruel monster and though this is a cruelty above the norm IMHO, it is the path nature has chosen through hills and the river flows where the land permits. It is likely not the most cruel time of all history and in fact the petty cruelty may not be sufficient to overcome the possible opponents that may arise.
In America and the allies it is said that terrorism is barbaric and insane that people would commit suicide to invade. I see no difference there. It is invasion by force and the fact that it is more barbaric and horrid implies that it might dominate. The American Indians could sit in their camps and say how barbaric the tactics of the invading people were, but in the end they were willing to spread disease, kill women and children, burn their homes, and kill their livestock to commit genocide of the peoples who lived in harmony with nature.
It was decided that all the tribes of the free world should come together at the Little Big Horn and fight the white eyed monster. Oh sorry, I meant the yellow skin terrorist at Iraq.
Nature is cruel and if this were the extent of it, that would be nothing, but the law of averages says that this is only a glimpse of the heart of darkness and I would wager heavily that what leaks from the nightmare world of the unknown will not only enchant and illuminate, but make this seem a bit like a Disney theme park in the final analysis.
I always look to ants as the creatures who in their nature have survived the longest in their form. They have a method which gives them advantage and perhaps it is that they have more brain than brawn.
New dimensions from old, The magic lamp
The image links to the computer music composer and the music there is very good. The thing that got me is this image from that page and how it thinks. I am afraid that it is correct, as we speak, the concept of a natural born human as the epitome of thought, rationality and capability is crumbling and the extension of mind in the machines becomes the new something and I don't know what it is. I have been moving toward this and there is no way to choose some other path. I can now make programs that solve problems that I cannot approach with my mind alone. Using the computer as extension of my reach, an intellectual prosthesis to augment my limited mind and time.
This uses blender.
This is an image from what I started doing with AI and dimensions and there really is something there that defines thought itself. What will it mean when reason and decision becomes a calculator that passes us at every turn. I see it in my own work. I create a program that creates programs and then it teaches me new things. This could be very entertaining.
If that is not scary enough, consider that I could then make the mind that makes the program that makes the music. The extension is only natural. It is recursion and by recursion the process expands. Below all of this is a level that is the ⌊floor⌋ on which it all stands. It seems to me that logic was improperly defined from its origin with the scholars 2,000 years ago and that it requires a new framework to actually complete this circle. It is there and soon it will be known and like the other odd consequence of this strange new world, it is bound to be an E ticket attraction. What happens when these things like the speech in video detection and integration with graphics and DNA combines with music and meta code generation. It is escalating. Once I think of the combinations in escalating factorial synergy it becomes prompt critical intellectually in a way similar to its namesake.
Getting used to Blender 2.50 Alpha
The image links to a video for Python with Blender 2.5 Alpha 1. I have been playing with it as well as watching videos of UCLA courses. Here is a link to information on the blender API.
On to another subject.
An interesting thing is that though they are so intent on showing how they solved the sequencing of DNA and feel it was extremely elegant and worthy of Nobel prize, these things are relative and when more is understood it seems very strange and indirect. I have the ability to look at atoms with my microscope and so I can simply trace a sequence by looking at it. This technology is not available to them and I have only had it for 9 years now. I am sure they will figure this out eventually, and will they still teach DNA restriction, overlap, cloning and sequencing with fluorescent markers as nostalgia? There are some things that are interesting and though it was innovative in its time, the fact that I had to walk to school in snow above my head to read a book I shared with ten people and it had only ten words in it isn't all that important in the scheme of things. So I can Wiki or Google something and use Blast to figure things out. Do I need to know that some people used to have to dig through 100,000 books at the library a few years ago. Things change and I get tired of hearing how great Frodo or Filbert was to have done this original work as it gets cumbersome when you have to remember 7,000 people who polished the glassware for Pasteur to pass a course. I am still wondering why I even need to remember the Entgegen and Zusammen naming system.
Automated Intelligence
Auftrag der unendlichen LOL katzen