Center Of Mass

Displaying the system's center of mass as a blue circle.

[@glorious2538]

Your channel is literally a hidden gem.

[@yusufklc7821]

yeah there are lots of cool sfml projects

[@skaramicke]

You are literally not using the word literally literally. The channel is perfectly visible. As if that wasn’t enough, it is in fact a KZbin channel and not a gem. It is figuratively a hidden gem.

[@glorious2538]

@@skaramicke Ya ever heard of an exaggerated metaphor?

[@Thrustmaster64]

@@glorious2538 I've literally never heard of that.

[@glorious2538]

@@Thrustmaster64 when you put literally into a metaphor, it exaggerates its meaning.

[@Beatsbasteln]

love when things turn out to be sine waves!

[@PoroConKa]

This video will appear as a recommended in 5 years more

[@KatzRool]

Does it always end up oscillating in a line like that? And is it always simple harmonic motion?

[@potatonoodlebear8035]

Without outside forcing or collision or friction, it should continue to oscillate forever.

[@oreos3174]

@@potatonoodlebear8035 I think he meant with different particles

[@aperson1]

By the laws of orbital mechanics, it should always either move in a line or an ellipse. I have a feeling in this case it will always be a line though, because an ellipse implies some transfer of force.

[@potatonoodlebear8035]

@@aperson1 ???

[@jiqci]

The collision system was buggy and turned out to be anti-collision system, so yes

[@Zac8668]

this is really cool

[@lennartgimm]

Why would the centre of mass oscillate like that? Without outside forces the centre of mass should move linearily, right? If you break it down, the COM has some momentum p which is the sum of all momentums in this simulation. Conversation of momentum now tells us that without outside forces the total momentum should not change. The total momentum is the sum of all momentums (momenta?) and thus equal to the momentum of the COM. So somethinghere isn't physical. I suspect the little balls avoid each other by being displaced by a few pixels instead of colliding, resulting in movement that doesn't contribute to the total momentum but does move the COM...

[@PezzzasWork]

What's isn't physical is that there is a virtual point with no mass attracting all objects at the center of the screen

[@lennartgimm]

@@PezzzasWork Oh I thought they were only attracted to one another :D Cheers for clearing that up :)

[@PezzzasWork]

@@lennartgimm no problem :)

[@kongolandwalker]

@@PezzzasWork "Displaying the system's center of mass as a blue circle." that is misleading. Center of mass and attractor have different meanings

[@PezzzasWork]

@@kongolandwalker the blue circle is the center of mass, the attractor is static at the center of the screen and not displayed

[@hahayes7205]

"its not a bug, its a feature"

[@user-sl6gn1ss8p]

Ooh, so what happens is that they nudge each other's orbits when they collide, which in time finds a stable configuration on which there are no collisions, since there is no changing external factor? Do the circles attract each other, or are they just attracted by the invisible attractor? Would this still happen without the attractor?

[@jameswhalley7462]

Without the invisible attractor the centre of mass would follow a path of constant velocity assuming normal conservation laws apply once the collisions stop occuring.

[@user-sl6gn1ss8p]

@@jameswhalley7462 yeah, it would, my question is whether it would get to the point where collisions stop occurring. It's not clear to me if the the circles are attracting each other and how much or if the attractor dominates, and how much does that affect the outcome (other than what you've pointed out)

[@jameswhalley7462]

@@user-sl6gn1ss8p The creator said elsewhere in a comment that the circles don't actually attract each other at all I believe.

[@user-sl6gn1ss8p]

@@jameswhalley7462 Makes sense. I would guess not, but I wonder if the same effect could eventually be achieved if the circles attracted each other

[@jameswhalley7462]

@@user-sl6gn1ss8p Interesting question. You might have just tempted me to simulate what you describe this weekend to find out for sure. I'll let you know if I find anything interesting.

[@manojpradhan943]

All your work is awsome I need some help . How much programming experience do you have ? I wanna be able to do all this . I am quite familiar with C++ and sfml and unity game engines but no expertise . Like how you just implement a procedural tree , just like that . The thing is , I am not able to keep my mind at one place . Like I would start with some idea for let's say a "self mutating simulation having some creature" , five minutes in I would start worrying about the design pattern . Whether entities should draw themselves , or should be drawn by a window.draw(entity) method . And that would lead to a another downhill spiral , rather than solving the actual problem . What pathway would you recommend to become proficient in implementing things . This itch of wanting to know behind the things of every thing that iam doing becomes a barrier . Almost like a overthinking . Thanks in advance !! .

[@PezzzasWork]

Thank you :) I have about 10 years of programming experience but most of it as a beginner. Like you I don't have expertise and my projetcs help me to improve myself. Regarding your problem I used to feel like you and then I started iterative development process. First I make a very ugly prototype only aiming for functionality. When it works, I then start to think of a better way of doing it. Your example of the draw method is a good one. During the prototyping phase I almost always inlcude it in my class (drone.draw(window) for example). Very often the draw method becomes big and the next iteration I create a "DroneRenderer" class taking care of it. In my opinion architectural design is a key skill to improve because it's where the real difficulty of programming is and that's true for all languages. You shouldn't try to do everything perfect the first time because it too discouraging and quite impossible!

[@manojpradhan943]

@@PezzzasWork thankyou thanku thankyou . Any resource that you would like to recommend. Unity is quite overwhelming . I guess one must be done with the concepts of shaders and rendering first before jumping directly onto full fledged game engines ? I have made one flight sim in unity but what I felt was you just get to learn unity api not actaul game dev.

[@mouradtulimat]

I tried getting a pathway for myself from this thread, I'm familiar with c++ but only competitive programming/problem solving and only now learning some advanced OOP, I'm trying to learn multiple things to see what suites me best, nothing too hard so far, but I have no Idea about visualizing, I have no intention in becoming a pro in this criteria, but I do wanna learn how to implement cool stuff like this even if it's ugly af, would learning sfml be enough for now? or should I start some where else? ps, don't go easy on me I'm some what of fast learner :3

[@nates9778]

@@manojpradhan943 Take a look at handmadehero (KZbin Channel is Molly Rocket) It's a really good source of someone making a game from scratch in c++ in windows and he explains everything down to detail.

[@Tinkerer_Red]

This makes me wonder if you could use this for chaos theory based seeding. For instance, after a perfect cycle for a single orb, would the other orbs still be in sync or would they be slightly off center? This could lead to the ability to add all of their x and y of each and use it for a seed value. Syncing this for online games could be extremely powerful, as long as they don't start repeating their locations every cycle. Would you be able to leave an outline location for every object, when object 1 finishes it's cycle?

[@Tinkerer_Red]

Also if you made them their center points the center of a gaussian blur, then make that the input for a distortion shader, you could have some amazing pulsing ameba or gore monster.

[@CCV334]

That’s awesome

[@gerardskomin6317]

Weirdly satisfying :P

[@nolanbie3664]

Be super cool to have this as a wall paper

[@tyrendel]

What if you make the central attractor apply a gravitational force (proportional to inverse square distance)?

[@Pauly421]

For anyone else confused. There is an invisible attractor in the center of the simulation. Which is something he really should have mentioned in the description. Still it's cool to watch.

[@VaradMahashabde]

But if all the forces are internal, shouldn't CoM stay still? or is there an unaccounted large mass orbiting in the distance?

[@LostieTrekieTechie]

It might be a result of calculation inaccuracies, or this simulation might be based on different physics than our own.. But yeah, in real life unless there is an external Force the center of mass should stay still or have constant velocity.

[@revimfadli4666]

It was said that there's an invisible attractor in the middle

[@Poulpink]

Isn't there a problem here ? Without external force, the center of mass should not have any acceleration (straight line / no movement) Edit: I see you said there is actually a force at the center, you should mention it in the description, this is disorienting fo rmost people

[@jadugniko3245]

Is it already released?

[@IlIllllIllIllIllIl]

Dope ass channel

[@keithmanning6564]

I wonder whether this would converge given any set of objects orbiting each other

[@leonpeitz6813]

Where is the difference between this and the big you created in one of your other videos?

[@fejfo6559]

why does the center of mass move?

[@PezzzasWork]

It moves because the system is unbalanced since there is a static attractor at the center of the screen. These objects are all independent

[@eyewear195]

I never like videos but these are amazing!

[@microm2078]

Why is the center of mass oscillating if there are only internal forces?

[@microm2078]

Or is there a centered external force for every object?

[@microm2078]

Plus its a beautiful video ;)

[@pritampattnaik2005]

Any way to do something like this in java?

[@nothingnothing1799]

Considering he made this in C++ I'd assume yes, java is based on C++.

[@iamdozerq]

Of course - just find any graphics lib.

[@alfonzo_]

I'd recommend libGDX. really easy to draw some circles on screen so you just have to code the physics.

[@pritampattnaik2005]

@@iamdozerq what’s a graphic lib lol

[@linsproul3548]

is it just displaying the center of mass or are the balls actually orbiting it?

[@ericscheit5540]

I feel dumb when I see people talking about stuff I have no clue about.

[@dr.oobleck2317]

What happens when you add boids rules?

[@APaleDot]

I thought the center of mass shouldn't move unless there is an outside force acting on it. Newton's Third Law and all that.

[@mubasshir]

I don't think that small is the centre of mass. It's probably not marked in the video. That dot is probably a particle.

[@APaleDot]

@@mubasshir Did you read the description?

[@mubasshir]

@@APaleDot I did. That circle looks green to me. Maybe that's where I went wrong. It still looks green to me

[@jonathanwalther]

@@mubasshir Either you are a troll or colorblind in the green/blue spectrum. The small dot in the middle is blue. At least "more" blue than all the other dots.

[@Pauly421]

There is an invisible attractor in the center of the simulation. Which is something he really should have mentioned in the description.

[@kadefringe]

Did he just solve n-body problem with a bunch of codes?

[@emilioannoni368]

n-body problem is about analytical solution (aka a one for all formula), not a computational approximation. You definitely would be eligible for the 1MLN prize for Navier Stokes equations with a relatively simple fluid simulation code that way hahaha

[@ofal4535]

Could you edit it so the balls will orbit oround center orb? Sth like sun

[@Apotheosis-]

Now do it with squares

[@user-xs6gb7vs3e]

Why the center of mass keep changing?

[@Eryna_]

The various circles are moving around, and sometimes more of them are going to be at one end rather than the other.

[@volo870]

Where's Mass? Is that where the toaster is?

[@jojodasjojo]

42

[@LunarSea]

чувак, прости, но єто візівает у меняз зубную боль )