Weird.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37026592 - Water (2023-08-06, 133 comments)
Thanks for the link!
If you dab a finger in the stream at right angles to the flow you made, the splash flows the expected way, but maybe slower than water.
It would be good to visualize any flow. And also to respond to device orientation so you can feed the resonance :)
Very cool!
I love Evan’s Pool demo. https://madebyevan.com/webgl-water/
Still very, very cool.
I have an OLED display too. SDR content looks really good on OLED displays because of the incredible contrast. It might appear HDR but is SDR.
It would be a shame if you implemented a free online version of it ;)
If navier-stokes equations can be derived from Newton's laws, then Newton's laws can be derived from Galileo, Archimedes before him, even some older thinkers before them.
Newton ignored viscosity, and density. He made some discoveries on fluid dynamics but his famous laws only apply to solid objects. Same for velocity, he knew about that of course but only worked it out for solids. Ignoring two critical components meant he didn't establish relations between them either.
That's my read.
Not to dismiss credits to Newton, who's is in another league than navier and stokes. In his own league even. He probably would have figured out what was only solved centuries later had he explored further, or had he benefited from perhaps just a few other later discoveries.
But that's dismissive of navier-stokes significant discoveries on fluid dynamics to not simply give them credit for the formula behind this simulation.
Oh, did you mean conservation?
Is it a scale issue? When I look at the sea it doesn't look much like this either, so I don't think so?
Is there a combination of parameters I could set in the simulation such that it looks like what I see when I pour myself a glass of water, or watch waves at the beach?
Or is it because all the real world examples I'm referencing are 3D, and this is 2d?
The fluid has a set lifetime instead of actually mixing, which makes it look different- normally the edges would dissipate faster than the areas that are all ink but instead it just all fades at the same rate.
The simulation is kind of 3d- since it's incompressible, pressure at any point is proportional to the height of the fluid. Advection still happens on a single plane, but if the pressure-related height is relatively large compared to the average depth of the fluid it's not a bad approximation. The viscous losses are also kind of arbitrary, but it's not far from water.
