@@Trekfolie l did python for 5 years before I decided to come to JS. I still use python for ML and data stuff and scripting, but Node and P5 are on next level for web and Graphics stuff.
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but one reason all of your photons may be getting sucked into black hole is that you're not accounting for the timestep when updating velocity, only position. This means that the "force" being exerted on all of your photons is much larger than it should be.
@@johnheikens Speaking of reddit, is there a dedicaated subreddit for Processsing or coding challenges? I mean those coding challenges that The Coding Train does.
I watched you do this live - but I'm watching this just to see how you edited all your mistakes and corrections together XD Edit: Ah, you just refilmed the intro... Well played, Shiffman.
I don't know you, i can't program for shit, would like to change that, and i would like to see a more serious simulation of a black hole, but none of that matters because you're so entertaining and make all this so interesting to watch, i'm amazed!
Is it possible to create a space-bend effect like on this picture: physicsworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/LLOYDblack-hole.jpg So this JS blackhole would warp a background image like this.
I'm pretty sure almost anything is possible to code, if you are a good enough programmer... Could i do it? saddly no, do i believe a good programmer could do that space-bend effect? I am pretty sure they could
If one would use the exact solution of Newtonian gravity (Kepler orbits), so do not compensate that the "photons" speeds up while faling towards the black hole, it can be shown that a particle would just graze the Schwarzschild radius (rs) if it start at sqrt(3)*rs≈1.73*rs. Coincidentally these particles also speed up at rs to a speed of sqrt(3) times the speed of light.
If you want to keep a trail without a performance hit, couldnt you get rid of the background in the draw loop and instead put it in setup? That way each photon line update is permanent? All you need to do is connect the most recent step to the second most recent. So your history would be maxed at 1 instead of 500 or whatever. In many applications this could make a messy mess but in something like this I see no downside.
Funny thing, if you could get close enough to the black hole, within the event horizon, you would see something. Nobody knows what, but you would see something. The light is not fast enough to escape the event horizon, but it can still bounce up a bit before it is sucked back down. Because we don't know how the light behaves inside the event horizon, we're not really sure how to visualise it, or calculate its behaviour.
I have a question, people always say that objects bend the spacetime mesh but is the spacetime mesh a 2d mesh or a 3d mesh? And if it’s a 3d mesh how does it “bend”?
I think is photon should be point not line so we can have batter imagination to the horizon and the photons should came from screen top right and down right to improve the some relation is really work... And thanks to the tutorial
Your photons can go slower then the speed of light, that's why it's so innacurate (Relativity is part of it, but photons going slower then the speed of light is part of it, too!)
Great visualisation sir. I would like to suggest you that rather than going more and more into good looking animation with Mass you should try out Energy . It will be more accurate. And actually Rs is actually calculated by the formula of escape velocity which technically is Newtonian so I mean you have a ton of math and stuff to do so I will suggest you to use processing instead for obvious reasons. Thanks and good luck (I'm waiting).😊
No, while calculating Rs using Newtonian gravity does give the same result, no physicist post Einstein is going to say that that is how you theoretically derive it.
The lights are traveling in a straight line it's just that the space-time around the black hole is warned due to intense gravity so the light never really changed its trajectory
@@zackytalib5393 as you see he is very influential and encourages people to code . c plus plus is one of the most dreaded and versatile languages out there. if he starts doing things in cpp ,you can clearly see whats gonna happen. I mean like he might not have that many of subscribers but his influence on people is real
sanchit verma well he can’t code in c++, his whole vibe is coding visually and sometimes with machine learning. C++ isn’t practical for visual programming and machine learning
Dan, your videos have helped me evolve from knowing basically nothing about Javascript to being offered a full time job in the space of one year. Thank you dude.
You could maybe write a ray tracer which does all of that stuff but from the front (send photons out from the "pixel layer" into the third dimension and see where they hit your pixel layer again) to render a picture
Xnoob Speakable That would be lowercase g, the acceleration of gravity. Uppercase G is the gravitational constant, which doesn’t really directly apply to anything we see, but it is a vital value in calculating most gravitational interactions in the universe. But don’t take my word for it; I don’t know much about it at all.
One way to boost performance could be removing `background(255)` from `draw()` function and `history` from `Photon` class, so that there's no need to redraw the photon trails...
10:40 - And hence one of the most terribly drawn whatever-those-squiggly-things-are-called-anyways-because-they're-probably-not-called-curly-brackets-when-they're-drawn-like-that-but-I-might-be-wrong was created!
While doing this coding challenge myself I named my class Blackhole and then created a Blackhole object saying, “let bhole;” “bhole = new Blackhole;” I did this for quite a while before my fiancé pointed out that maybe b-hole isn’t the best name for my Blackhole.
Did you ever multiply the added gravitational force with your delta time? I feel like you will get different results depending on your time scale (dt) with this solution, since it affects the photons speed but not its attraction to the black hole. I know I'm three years late to this but if I'm wrong I'd be happy to hear an explanation :)
The reason it doesn't work is because in general relativity you have an extra cubed term in the attractive "force" you have to simulate, which results in some really unintuitive orbits very close to the black hole. I really really recommend this amazing interactive applet that simulates the actual equations. www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/orbits/ In a way those crazy orbits are always possible but hidden because you can't go so close to the centre of mass of say the Earth. Black holes just make it possible to get close enough for those extra terms to start causing rosettes and photon spheres and other weird orbits. Anyway I'm not a physicist but I went down the rabbit hole trying to simulate this in a shader a while back and I can't remember all of the details, but I found some articles that managed to make me understand what's different.
I am sorry, but I would not thank Veritassium, Derek has a lot of people who'll tell him stuff. That's how he gets extreme amount of traffic for "science" videos, which fall just short on correctness, thoroughness, and as we all know are examples of bad scientific process.
I noticed that you said something like "30 pixels per frame.. thats pretty slow for movement". But thats 900 pixels travelled a second, already past the screen!
you'd probably get a significant performance increase if you did not add to one end of the array an then delete from the other every frame. Instead, keep an index and just replace the item at that index. The way it is now causes you to have to shift every element of the array over every frame after you delete that first element. I'd also preallocate all the memory needed for that array rather than just add to it on demand. That way you won't need to keep reallocating memory for the buffer and copying the items to the new memory location when it grows. To piggyback off that, you should also be constantly updating the history so it represents a path of vertices using the least number of vertices needed. For example, those lines are straight for a long while so they really only need 2 vertices, whereas you have hundreds all in that straight line.
hey one thing I do know is the movie interstellar they used allot of data to recreate the black hole. They scaled it up for visual aesthetics but supposedly was pretty accurate. They have a book on that movie and stuff that has it labeled speculative and factual or data driven ect. Their minds would be a good one to pick in how they rendered that prob love your videos!
So, just for your information, when scientists run simulations of the caliber you want to do they run it on super computers and it takes days to months. My research advisor is doing gamma-ray burst jet simulations and he said it takes several minutes to generate just a few nanoseconds of simulation data. And that generation time will only increase as the jets expand outwards (getting exponentially larger).
Of course a 2 dimensional version with simplified visuals of a "simpler" system (like a black hole) would be much "easier" to generate, but I imagine the level of difficulty scales down about the same amount as the loss in computational power does. So it would still take a long time to generate the data.
![DDG & G Herbo - Nosey [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I9Ra0Zc2NlQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Yailin La Mas Viral, @kreizyk.official - Dale 2 (Remix) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JaYHBzgqz94/mqdefault.jpg)
Wow....You are really a Prodigy in JavaScript....Love your Enthusiasm and Teaching Style.
I'm learning Python atm but his style makes me want to learn JS instead.
Welp I'm still watching his videos and enjoying it so much.
@@Trekfolie l did python for 5 years before I decided to come to JS. I still use python for ML and data stuff and scripting, but Node and P5 are on next level for web and Graphics stuff.
0:25 that synched-up hand gesture looks almost intentional
Luca Felicetti Lmao facts
Was gonna write this comment :D
Oh wow
Whoa, I did not notice this!
The other hand is the same syncing on the other side of the black hole 😆
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but one reason all of your photons may be getting sucked into black hole is that you're not accounting for the timestep when updating velocity, only position. This means that the "force" being exerted on all of your photons is much larger than it should be.
4:45 RIP youtube compression algorithm.
No one
Engineers: c=30 and G=6
Don Grille super great
What are you talking about c = 299752458 m/s *SQUARED*
@@ΛεωνίδαςΓκώγκος r/woooosh
@@johnheikens Speaking of reddit, is there a dedicaated subreddit for Processsing or coding challenges?
I mean those coding challenges that The Coding Train does.
@@ΛεωνίδαςΓκώγκος Actually it's 299792458.
We know what the speed of light is. Now, at 24:04, we know what the sound of light is, too!
That sound he made was so funny, mostly because in his position i'd do exactly the same. That nice smooth animation, just asks for that sound
I watched you do this live - but I'm watching this just to see how you edited all your mistakes and corrections together XD
Edit: Ah, you just refilmed the intro... Well played, Shiffman.
Yeah, I like leaving coding mistakes in, but if I'm getting actual science wrong it's too painful to watch!
It's Friday night; wanted to relax and watch a movie, and ended up watching this :D Thank you for the video - you are one of the best!!!
I wish I could relate man, I so so wish!
"Then, I calculate the change in angle based on the relativistic curvature of space time" -Dan 👏 using JavaScript. 😀 😆 Man I love this channel.
Thanks to you, Dan, I was able to understand Derek's video. When I first watched it, I didn't understand it very much
Why is your channel doesn't get millions of views? It's such a good and quality content herw
cus the most people like to do easy things
I love how Veritasium's video on the black hole image was the 5th recommended video in my sidebar
How he is doing the same movement with his hand at 0:24 xD
Lol
ffs i just wanted to stay that
lol what?
Can you combine "rendering raycasting" with this? Would be awesome 😍
Daniel. You are the BEST most annoying teacher I've ever seen. Thank you.
I'd rather learn physics from you
I would learn anything from my professors if they had 1/3 of the amount of enthusiasm and heart he puts into his videos.
But you couldn't. He doesn't knoe much about physics.
Great Video! I used to love making these types of projects in university!
"I don't play a physicist on youtube" is that a loose Scott Manley reference? :D
0:25 I like how he does the same arm gesture in both vids
the sync, pleasures my OCD
I don't know you, i can't program for shit, would like to change that, and i would like to see a more serious simulation of a black hole, but none of that matters because you're so entertaining and make all this so interesting to watch, i'm amazed!
I was about to go and sleep but a coding train notification popped up
Love those long videos so much!!!!!!!!!!!
Very good video(I actually learned a lot from this video!!)
Is it possible to create a space-bend effect like on this picture:
physicsworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/LLOYDblack-hole.jpg
So this JS blackhole would warp a background image like this.
I'm pretty sure almost anything is possible to code, if you are a good enough programmer... Could i do it? saddly no, do i believe a good programmer could do that space-bend effect? I am pretty sure they could
Broooo.... My own task of my p5 chalange was make a black hole model, but u also does it😮
If one would use the exact solution of Newtonian gravity (Kepler orbits), so do not compensate that the "photons" speeds up while faling towards the black hole, it can be shown that a particle would just graze the Schwarzschild radius (rs) if it start at sqrt(3)*rs≈1.73*rs. Coincidentally these particles also speed up at rs to a speed of sqrt(3) times the speed of light.
If you want to keep a trail without a performance hit, couldnt you get rid of the background in the draw loop and instead put it in setup? That way each photon line update is permanent? All you need to do is connect the most recent step to the second most recent. So your history would be maxed at 1 instead of 500 or whatever. In many applications this could make a messy mess but in something like this I see no downside.
Yes, this is a good idea! Using createGraphics() for the photon trails would be a great solution.
thank you for making such a great video! love it
You have to try to make it 3D that is gonna be cool!
In JS you can write numbers like 100_000_000 it means the same as 100000000 but its very better to read
Hats off to matthieu ;) :D
5:36 Black holes are flat confirmed!
I luv JS and your explanation
Funny thing, if you could get close enough to the black hole, within the event horizon, you would see something. Nobody knows what, but you would see something.
The light is not fast enough to escape the event horizon, but it can still bounce up a bit before it is sucked back down.
Because we don't know how the light behaves inside the event horizon, we're not really sure how to visualise it, or calculate its behaviour.
Could you do this and actually solve the field equations in js? Personally I would do it as a reverse ray-trace
12:25 - 6.67e-11. No need for pow plus using e is likely more precise.
Oh, yes, thanks for the tip!
I have a question, people always say that objects bend the spacetime mesh but is the spacetime mesh a 2d mesh or a 3d mesh? And if it’s a 3d mesh how does it “bend”?
I think is photon should be point not line so we can have batter imagination to the horizon and the photons should came from screen top right and down right to improve the some relation is really work...
And thanks to the tutorial
Still starting to watch, but i'm sure the challenge will be awesome!
What did you think?
Was very interesting, i think the newtonian physics simulation actually yielded pretty accurate results
Request: Colliding Galaxies
Good video, but you completely messed up with physics. For black holes you need to use relativistic mechanics and schwarzschild space-time metric.
Which programing language his coding with???its awwwweeesoooome
This video uses JavaScript with the p5.js library, for more: p5js.org.
Hi I have a question on your 7.6 object intersection how would it work with a square and a circle intersecting?
would be interesting to see this used in a raycaster
Your photons can go slower then the speed of light, that's why it's so innacurate (Relativity is part of it, but photons going slower then the speed of light is part of it, too!)
Great visualisation sir. I would like to suggest you that rather than going more and more into good looking animation with Mass you should try out Energy . It will be more accurate. And actually Rs is actually calculated by the formula of escape velocity which technically is Newtonian so I mean you have a ton of math and stuff to do so I will suggest you to use processing instead for obvious reasons.
Thanks and good luck (I'm waiting).😊
Predicting motion with energy is much more complicated than it is with forces. But I'd love to see him use Lagrangian mechanics at some point.
No, while calculating Rs using Newtonian gravity does give the same result, no physicist post Einstein is going to say that that is how you theoretically derive it.
lol thought this is a blender tutorial cause the orange black circle looks like the blender logo
we like Dan because he never act like teacher. This attitude makes him great teacher on internet.
What apps you use to edit your videos. Like a video in video background
RUTIK WANKHADE the second video is from his live streams (the long videos). Watch almost any of those and he almost always goes over the set up :)
It does not work because Rs depends on G, c and M these values were set arbitrarily.
how can i blur my strokes with p5js?
Universe: Unzip here....
the mass of the black hole is 6,5B bot 2,6B
The lights are traveling in a straight line it's just that the space-time around the black hole is warned due to intense gravity so the light never really changed its trajectory
re-upload?
nice
ace stuff
Could you update the code on github? Looks like blackhole.js is still the old version.
Ok. Looking at the code changes at the end, I also had to set this.theta = this.vel.heading(); in the Photon class for the whole thing to work.
Here are the two sketches!
editor.p5js.org/codingtrain/sketches/2zZqSkxtj
editor.p5js.org/codingtrain/sketches/4DvaeH0Ur
using python might make this a tribute!
te amo
a b o u t t i m e.....get it
Why you code everythinh in javascript? 😆
4:49
this.this.distance
10:00 brb
Watch his hands as he says "to DO this simulation". They're the same gestures in the stream clip and in his future commentary! 0:22 hilarious!
7.673208867×10^12m
13:05 That's stupid. Everybody knows you should not use kg but "solar masses" as a unit for such large objects.
a
r_s
*prove earth isn't flat, my friend wanna see it* ( me )
U could have used CSS , it's much simpler than this algorithm
pls c++
sanchit verma that’s like so far from his specialty
@@zackytalib5393 as you see he is very influential and encourages people to code . c plus plus is one of the most dreaded and versatile languages out there. if he starts doing things in cpp ,you can clearly see whats gonna happen. I mean like he might not have that many of subscribers but his influence on people is real
sanchit verma well he can’t code in c++, his whole vibe is coding visually and sometimes with machine learning. C++ isn’t practical for visual programming and machine learning
@@zackytalib5393 aww man
At 35:32 I had a question, whether light can orbit black holes. Found the answer en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innermost_stable_circular_orbit
Dan, your videos have helped me evolve from knowing basically nothing about Javascript to being offered a full time job in the space of one year. Thank you dude.
This is great but scary. I mean all the fors, and ifs, and vars, and scope pollution...
@@badunius_code can't forget the "this dot"
You could maybe write a ray tracer which does all of that stuff but from the front (send photons out from the "pixel layer" into the third dimension and see where they hit your pixel layer again) to render a picture
This deserves more likes
c=30
G=6
All my engineering teachers are crying...
But i love your videos
I would rather take one constant and make everything else in percentage about the first one
@@williampecoraro653 Yes, that's a great suggestion!
Isn't it like 9.8m/s sQuaREd?
Xnoob Speakable That would be lowercase g, the acceleration of gravity. Uppercase G is the gravitational constant, which doesn’t really directly apply to anything we see, but it is a vital value in calculating most gravitational interactions in the universe. But don’t take my word for it; I don’t know much about it at all.
One way to boost performance could be removing `background(255)` from `draw()` function and `history` from `Photon` class, so that there's no need to redraw the photon trails...
10:40 - And hence one of the most terribly drawn whatever-those-squiggly-things-are-called-anyways-because-they're-probably-not-called-curly-brackets-when-they're-drawn-like-that-but-I-might-be-wrong was created!
Atleast he tried
@@satyampandey2222 Tru, tru
😂
Nice editing for this video. :-)
The physicist inside me screamed you to set c=1
shoehaze and also g=1 😭
Then you're not really that much of a physicist. We often set c=1 in what's called Natural Units.
well theoretical physicists actually use natural units where c=hbar=1
While doing this coding challenge myself I named my class Blackhole and then created a Blackhole object saying, “let bhole;” “bhole = new Blackhole;” I did this for quite a while before my fiancé pointed out that maybe b-hole isn’t the best name for my Blackhole.
From a dull drawing to a crazy good simulation, this is what programming is!
I just wanna say thank you a lot for adding subtitles for hard of hearing. Please do so in the future
Did you ever multiply the added gravitational force with your delta time? I feel like you will get different results depending on your time scale (dt) with this solution, since it affects the photons speed but not its attraction to the black hole. I know I'm three years late to this but if I'm wrong I'd be happy to hear an explanation :)
You're the best, bro! Just got the book "The Nature of Code" and I'm enjoying it.
The reason it doesn't work is because in general relativity you have an extra cubed term in the attractive "force" you have to simulate, which results in some really unintuitive orbits very close to the black hole. I really really recommend this amazing interactive applet that simulates the actual equations. www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/orbits/
In a way those crazy orbits are always possible but hidden because you can't go so close to the centre of mass of say the Earth. Black holes just make it possible to get close enough for those extra terms to start causing rosettes and photon spheres and other weird orbits.
Anyway I'm not a physicist but I went down the rabbit hole trying to simulate this in a shader a while back and I can't remember all of the details, but I found some articles that managed to make me understand what's different.
I am speechless. You, sir, are a living legend.
I am sorry, but I would not thank Veritassium, Derek has a lot of people who'll tell him stuff. That's how he gets extreme amount of traffic for "science" videos, which fall just short on correctness, thoroughness, and as we all know are examples of bad scientific process.
I noticed that you said something like "30 pixels per frame.. thats pretty slow for movement". But thats 900 pixels travelled a second, already past the screen!
you'd probably get a significant performance increase if you did not add to one end of the array an then delete from the other every frame. Instead, keep an index and just replace the item at that index. The way it is now causes you to have to shift every element of the array over every frame after you delete that first element. I'd also preallocate all the memory needed for that array rather than just add to it on demand. That way you won't need to keep reallocating memory for the buffer and copying the items to the new memory location when it grows.
To piggyback off that, you should also be constantly updating the history so it represents a path of vertices using the least number of vertices needed. For example, those lines are straight for a long while so they really only need 2 vertices, whereas you have hundreds all in that straight line.
Oh ya!, I love to see that again.
hey one thing I do know is the movie interstellar they used allot of data to recreate the black hole. They scaled it up for visual aesthetics but supposedly was pretty accurate. They have a book on that movie and stuff that has it labeled speculative and factual or data driven ect. Their minds would be a good one to pick in how they rendered that prob love your videos!
_Thanks for having English captions Or subtitles_
The quality on these videos are are getting amazing.
6:24 I'm not entirely sure if my math is correct, but it came out to about 7.67616655e12
edited 3 times just because of how bad my math was
Here is a black hole in shader toy. www.shadertoy.com/view/tsBXW3
Really need GPU shaders with raytracing to do this.
Wow! Thank you for sharing this.
My new favorite channel on RUclips. Your stuff's brilliant so glad I found this channel
YES, I've always wanted to see this! Thank you!
Owh yeah....i love this when u talk about science and javascript..........😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
This was relatively interesting. Here, have a thumbs up!
So, just for your information, when scientists run simulations of the caliber you want to do they run it on super computers and it takes days to months. My research advisor is doing gamma-ray burst jet simulations and he said it takes several minutes to generate just a few nanoseconds of simulation data. And that generation time will only increase as the jets expand outwards (getting exponentially larger).
Of course a 2 dimensional version with simplified visuals of a "simpler" system (like a black hole) would be much "easier" to generate, but I imagine the level of difficulty scales down about the same amount as the loss in computational power does. So it would still take a long time to generate the data.
Thanks for this feedback and additional info!