CodingTrain / CodingTrain/Suggestion-Box
Spacetime geometry around a black hole
- 主要言語
- 言語のデータがありません
- スター
- 570
- フォーク
- 85
- PR マージ指標
- 30日以内にマージされた PR はありません
説明
[_Copy/pasted from [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/user/shiffman/discussion)..._]
Hi Dan,
I love watching your channel and I'd like to offer a coding challenge!
If you search Google Images for "[spacetime geometry around a black hole](https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=spacetime+geometry+around+a+black+hole&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjSzMfst43SAhWGLcAKHb6rBgEQ_AUICSgC)" you'll see a multitude of artists impressions of a 'rubber sheet' grid distorted by a central mass, with comparisons between something Earth-sized, a star and finally a black hole. The exact geometry varies widely from one picture to the next.
I think what they're trying to show is the 'excess radius' predicted by relativity. However, I think the Earth only has a theoretical excess radius of a few millimeters, so the rubber sheet would be almost flat, and even the Sun only produces a nominal distortion. Obviously you have to scale these things to see anything, but by how much?
I'd like to see a 3D model made using p5, with sliders to adjust the scale, the mass and the radius of the sphere. The radius is important as a solid body will produce a different geometry to a point-like mass, and when you're considering very large masses there's an interesting point where the surface of the sphere becomes smaller than the Schwarzchild radius.
I did a little digging around to get you started and found what I think would be a useful set of equations at: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-feynmans-excess-radius-for-a-black-hole.322567/
What do you think? :-)
コントリビューションガイド
このリポジトリのコントリビューションガイドは索引されていません
調査の方向性
リポジトリのファイルやテストは指定されていません。まず、リンクされた物理学の議論と issue 内の p5 要件を確認してください。完了条件は、スケール、質量、球の半径を調整するスライダーを備えた時空幾何学の 3D モデルであり、剛体の場合とシュヴァルツシルト半径の場合を含みます。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
評価
- 技術スタック
- javascript
- 領域
- computer-graphics
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 活発さ
- 停滞
- 明瞭さ
- 説明が足りない
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 25/100