To: Stultis
Uh, but the robots actually DO it. Yup. And the surface they leave is rough, requiring buffing and polishing at least.
The original point was the amount of information in a car. A real car. Which means you must numerically describe the shiny surface of the metal. The multiple layers of the paint. And result in something measurably identical to a real car.
THAT is numerically impossible.
The reason I'm making that comparison is I'm studying how to do software 3D rendering now, and I'm recognizing the serious limitations involved.
117 posted on
12/31/2005 1:14:23 PM PST by
narby
(Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
To: narby
Numerically impossible placemarker. ;^)
119 posted on
12/31/2005 1:42:42 PM PST by
balrog666
(A myth by any other name is still inane.)
To: narby
And imagine the level of detail required to make the no-line bifocal type lenses people wear. THat's where precision curvature and optics come together.
120 posted on
12/31/2005 2:03:57 PM PST by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: narby
"The reason I'm making that comparison is I'm studying how to do software 3D rendering now, and I'm recognizing the serious limitations involved. Been there, done that, forgotten all 20 years ago.
126 posted on
12/31/2005 3:04:59 PM PST by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: narby
And the surface they leave is rough, requiring buffing and polishing at least. Geve 'em enough time and they'll figger a better way.
(That is if the Japenese robots don't get 7 Sigma down pat a clean their plows!)
180 posted on
01/01/2006 2:29:43 PM PST by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson