What happens when....

TIG

What happens when you try to locate the position of the colour grey in 3D space? Is white at 0,0,0?
This is a non-sequitur. A colour is a property of an object and so it has no independent existence - an object can be said to exist in 3d space, a colour might belong to an object, but it cannot be thought of as being in 3d space itself. Used as an abstract concept a 'colour' becomes like 'beauty' or 'width' - and none of these have a physical presence in the real world - only as the property of a real 3d object. So the answer is, 'Nothing happens, as you cannot locate a color in 3d space; and therefore the 'non-change' cannot change its properties.' If you were to change the question to, 'What happens when you try to locate the position of an object that has the colour grey in 3D space? Is white at 0,0,0?', then the answer is also that it's illogical, moving an object does not imply its colour will change - although of course given external influences [not mentioned in the question at all!] like proximity to some other agent like a source of light/heat etc the object's colour may well change depending on its relative location - as it heats up it might glow differently...
On a note of 'convention' - [0,0,0] would normal be thought of as 'black' - i.e. there is no red/green/blue, while 'white' is [255,255,255] using RGB or [1,1,1] OR [100,100,100] using unity/%; because the question does not clarify this issue we can only assume, but there are no common conventions where the absence of colour is 'white'... So an adjunct to the answer could also be, 'There is no logical reason in the framing of the question that suggests that being at a particular 3d coordinate would affect an object's colour, and there is no conventional reasoning to make 'white' as [0,0,0] .'
If you 'corrected' the inversion in the colouring and substituted 'black' for 'white' the first part stands, about 'no reason to suppose location affects colour', but you can omit the second part about 'convention for [0,0,0]'...

Stacking coloured objects in space is completely arbitrary - depending on your rules any one of your collection of 'all coloured objects' could be at located [0,0,0] X/Y/Z, irrespective of its actual RGB or any other color-classification system you've adopted. If you then adjust your colour-referencing system to match how you've stacked everything, then you've just invented another reference system, you have NOT found some deep meaningful inter-relationship between these stacked objects and their colours. Whether it's a sphere, a disk, a rectangle, a line, a double-helix, a pyramid etc, and where this collection then stands in 3d space, is determined by the stacker and not by the inherent property of the colours themselves ???

Alan Fraser

Solve that problem and you'd probably find God. Grey is 42.

I dug this out on the effect of no moon:-
The first natural phenomenon that would give out is the tides. The sudden disappearance of the moon would completely upend the tidal system. There would still be some movement. Waves would still break on the west sides of continents, due to the rotation of the earth.

Or at least they would at first, since the motion of the earth would become unpredictable. Once the moon kicked out the earth would precess like a top which has spun down enough to wobble, but not topple over. This would be a heck of a wobble. The earth would move so radically that it could sometimes spin perpendicular to the plane of its orbit. In other words, the southern or northern hemisphere would be exposed to the sun at all times, while the other hemisphere would be perpetually dark. At other times, it would spin exactly parallel to the plane of orbit, eliminating the seasons by making all days equally long.

The world-killing precession would take a long time to murder the last of the human race, but in the meantime we'd be entertained by ordinary disasters. The moon exerts gravitational stress on the earth as well as the sea, and some consider it a factor in continental drift. As a result, we might see an uptick in volcano and earthquake activity. Meanwhile, any plants and animals which had their reproduction or migration scheduled tied to the lunar cycle would be completely scrambled. The collapse of fish, bird, and insect populations would put a strain and local ecology and result in starvation and social disintegration.

......Oh! and it would also be harder to see at night.

Rich O Brien

There you go bringing fact to the table when the questions posted are devoid of fact.

The question's point is to make you place a color value at a point and then extrapolate all remaining colours from that point to create a shape [object]. Do you get a sphere, cube, cylinder etc?

I like Andy's thinking that colour is linear in a 3D space.

@Alan
Thanks for that, especially the poles flipping. Reminds me of a Hawkings documentary describing when Andromeda starts to collide with out galaxy. A lights how lasting millions of years with a disappointing end

TIG

Without a moon there would still be some tides [as opposed to rotation lag affects in the liquid part of the crust [the sea]] because the sun's remaining influence. They'd be a lot less affect, but it'd still be noticeable - at the moment the sun+moon combo causes higher or lower total tides when they are on the same or opposite sides of the earth and combine their affect or counteract one another.
However, this issue of tides is completely outweighed by other matters arising...

The sudden disappearance of the moon would undoubtedly be catastrophic.
The continental plates would shift and ease as the usual tidal pressures on the mantle changed - immediate earthquakes and volcanoes...
The sudden loss of a significant part of the mass from the combined earth-moon system would cause an immediate orbit change - by changing our angular momentum, affecting the day length and year length, and most likely moving us out of the 'Goldilocks zone' into a less clement zone where we'd freeze [or possibly boil]...
The issue of the earth's 'precedence' wobble is perhaps more uncertain - but the earth's wobble would certainly become unpredictable, and what was left of our seasons that it creates would become untenable. Although a the volcanoes erupted, the crust split open, and a new ice-age started etc, the same matter of your wheat/rice/maize/potato crops failing might pale into insignificance for a few days, until you died...

All in all, if the moon were suddenly to disappear then we'd all be completely buggered - albeit briefly until we were all dead !

Box

Now Tig you are straying into the realms of fantasy, we all know that nuclear waste from Earth stored on the Moon's far side exploded in a catastrophic accident on 13 September 1999, knocking the Moon out of orbit and sending it and the 311 inhabitants of Moonbase Alpha hurtling uncontrollably into space, and there haven't been any problem like you describe in the last 13 years or so.

Gaieus

When I was a kid I saw that series (like it pretty much although our standards of CG have been risen since then).

andybot

Rich, Here's what I was picturing about 3D color
http://youtu.be/x0-qoXOCOow

and you must be thinking of Munsell color system

TIG

@unknownuser said:

There you go bringing fact to the table when the questions posted are devoid of fact.
The question's point is to make you place a color value at a point and then extrapolate all remaining colours from that point to create a shape [object]. Do you get a sphere, cube, cylinder etc?
But as I said you can place an object of any color at any 3d point and invent a referencing system to suit that.
The stacked form can also be anything you like - you invent the rules...

A stacked cube of 1x1x1 sub-cubes that's 255x255x255 in all, with its bottom left corner at [0,0,0] can represent all of the RGB colors in steps of 1 unit [the integer limit to RGB colors anyway].
The cube at [0,0,0] is black.
The cube at [255,255,255] is white
The cube at [128,128,128] is mid-gray.
Thus the 'diagonal' line of cubes from [0,0,0] to [255,255,255] is monochrome shades of gray from black to white.
The pure 'colored' cubes at at the extreme corners and vary towards black th nearer they are to the origin.
The attached example SKP shows this - I've used only 10x10x10 with ~x25.5 steps to avoid a stupidly sized SKP ! It's still 1000 cubes and 1000 materials !
This is the code to do the coloring [it adds some alpha transparency for clarity]

def colorcubes() 
  model=Sketchup.active_model
  model.start_operation('colorcubes', true)
  ss=model.selection
  ss.each{|e|
    next unless e.class==Sketchup;;ComponentInstance
	xyz=e.bounds.min.to_a
	r=(xyz.x*25.5).to_i
	g=(xyz.y*25.5).to_i
	b=(xyz.z*25.5).to_i
    e.material=[r,g,b]
	e.material.alpha=0.5
  }
  model.commit_operation
end

cc.skp

Rich O Brien

Extreme. Like the troubleshoot scene

TIG

The Troubleshooting Style is useful for finding what you've done wrong with making geometry etc - without messing with the camera etc ! I meant to delete it !

What do you think of the 3d color idea...

Rich O Brien

Excellent....intriguing....bespoke....Pilouesque

gilles

I have drawn 1000 instances of a cube,selected them, opened the ruby console, pasted your code and pressed enter: it returned Nil.
what am I doing wrong?

TIG

The cubes must be instances of a component, which should be 1"x1"x1" - any placed beyond 10" from the origin will be 'white'.
The color of each material increments in steps of '~10'.
You can't copy/paste the code as it's multi-line [maybe on some MACs ?].
If you want to try it put the whole code into a file colorcubes.rb in Plugins restart SUp, and type colorcubes in the Ruby Console to process any preselected cubes...
To see the effect more quickly omit any cubes inside.
BUT having the 1000 cubes does allow you to use a section cut to see the affects... Note how the combos of RGB at the three max corners for the axes, then make cyan/yellow/magenta at the other three 'common corners' - with black/white for absolute min/max corners

gilles

Works fine thank you.