- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by Anonymous.
May 31, 2019 at 3:05 am #61429Anonymous
I want to make sure I understand this:
Object: fragment to complete “Primitive”
Model: Collection of objects into an ideal whole (?)
Entity: and instance of an ideal model(?)
Primitives are basic shapes (polygons) used to create a 3D models, items like cudes, spheres, cones; which can be manipulated via transforms etc
Models are completed 3D “objects” (to break the rules I’ll call it an object) – HOWEVER: models exists as sprite files in a library which can then be imported into a map…
Entities are models which are imported into a map (i.e. and instance of, or application of a model)
Object oriented programming analogy
An object exists as a function which has been “abstracted” out of procedural context into a Class. This allows for reuse of said object, concurrently, as instances
A class exists as a collection of objects (a set of related functions).
And instance exists as an “called” and initated class – once “instance” of the class which maintains and restricts scope to its instance. Many instances can be run simultaeously (reused) with out “collisions” because each encloses its variable scope.
Object I think is the same as the video states – a fragment or building block of a larger whole
Class would be equivalent to a model
Instance equivalent to an entity
One last thought – and atoms is to a molecule as an object is to a model (models are complete composites where as atoms are pure elements)
WHY MAKE THIS DISTINCTION – objects maybe “complete” in on sense, but are not complete within a scale which include relations to other parts i.e. lacks constant relations…
material is to machine what objects are to model.
Can anyone confirm I’ve not lost the plot?
May 31, 2019 at 2:03 pm #61441ajrwalkerParticipant
I agree and share the same understanding.
May 31, 2019 at 2:37 pm #61444Curt DoolittleKeymaster
Yes, bill that is correct.
SERIES: Stimuli(Nerves) > location-relations(‘pixels’) > Objects(fragments to primitives) > Models ( category ) > Entity (instance) > Map(space defined by relative position of entities) > simulation (prediction of future state of map).
Objects (rim, handle, surface) > Models (coffee-cup-like) > Entity(The cup I am holding) > Map (me, hands, cup, table, walls) > simulation ( prediction of the other side of the cup if I rotate it).
Maybe should edit and pin Bill’s op above because it brings together multiple frames.
- This reply was modified 2 years, 6 months ago by Curt Doolittle.
May 31, 2019 at 7:32 pm #61468Anonymous
Thanks for confirming.
(I’m keeping it slow and carefully, or else I’ll run with one aspect like a crack-ho on payday, and subsequently gloss over equally important aspects.)
June 11, 2019 at 3:38 am #62199Anonymous
From a conversation elsewhere:
If you think of each sensory system we have as a map, and each map layered over each other (parallel dimensions) – and think of that as one system (vertical interactions through the maps) – emotion becomes the dimension that gauges changes in the state of that system….
So as curt says elsewhere – emotions results from changes to inventory with in the system – losses and gains including losses and gains in future opportunities…. And investments/malinvestments made in the system (bias etc)
Re pure relations and the sun and stars being and example:
Buckminster Fuller had a lecture on this.
Said that we could look at the moon all we want, but we’d never discover gravity until we observe it in relation to the earth and then again to the sun
We’d not discover that quality of the substance by studying it in isolation.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login here