Well, you could record it and play a video or create an HTML page that somehow shows this... But JS ist probably not performant enough to render that in realtime. EDIT: Just bought Wallpaper Engine, HTML with JavaScript works. P5.js is possible too. Looking forward to create some nice backgrounds :)
@@kuwertzel8938 JS defineatly has performance to a lot of stuff with WebGL, it can even utilize GPU... And wallpaper engine supports unity games made in C# anyway
I'm now tempted to try to make an actual star simulation (eg. making radiation pressure, + make gravity be between individual particles instead of just towards the center, although that would cause more lag)
A few more ideas. Heat: Increases Instability/Overshoots. Fusion.Most Particles start as hydrogen.There however will be Helium,Lithium,And a few other trace elements. A Certain Amount of Pressure is needed for Fusion of Heavier Elements. Elements (Iron) that cannot Fuse together will have pressure resistance instead,Which will hopefully allow neutron stars in your simulations. Pressure Resistance has a limit though,making black holes hopefully possible. Gravity: Attraction is not limited to one spot,But to all particles which will cause particles clumping together to form a big mass that will keep fusing with other big masses Magnetism: Um.I think this is currently too complicated to explore
A type 1a supernova simulation would be cool. A stable cluster (white dwarf) slowly feeding off of a constant stream of particles (mass from the orbiting companion) until the physics engine breaks (core reignites).
@@user-pk9qo1gd6r i expected it to reach a critical mass where it starts emitting ‘radiation’, but i guess energy plays a big enough role that it can go straight to exploding
Why not make a version where every particle is attracted to every other particle (or the closest few particles to improve speed) instead of a single arbitrary point?
@@Joe-if8dn That's the point, different stars interacting and colliding like we see in the real-life galaxy would be more interesting than a single star.
That would be computationally expensive. Instead, how about a gravitational “heightmap” for the particles to follow? It would calculate the total mass in each tile and determine its height that way, then invert it to create the gravitational plane that everything is based around. That would create a less computationally expensive simulation because each particle only has to calculate the immediate gravitational curvature at its current location, and the gravitational plane only has to calculate the total mass in each tile. After all, gravity is closely related to mass.
it would be cool if, as in real life, to make it so that as particles gather at one point, then the attraction of gravity increases the rest of the particles, which can create a black hole. and in this simulation the particles are not accelerated towards other particles in the group
Wouldn't it be neat if some of these ejections fell into orbit instead of falling back into the star? I think the star would stabilize as it lost mass to the formation of a protoplanetary disk. :)
It is not a reupload, it is just another video about previous experimentations. But what I don't understand is how so many people see this video when I did not enable notifications, was it in you recommandations ?
linear force law (attraction to the center only) with collision detection, collision detection is bugged, so for high pressures you get violation of conservation of energy and unreasonably high particle speeds, which acts as a surprisingly resourceful stand-in for nuclear fusion.
@@ecgwineicling2543 yes! And I'm finding that adding a constant into the denominator , to avoid divide by zero, is very similar to strong nuclear force of repulsion at 7 femto meters iirc. It's almost as if the Creator ran into the same issues in our universe!
