It’s surprisingly hard to google though; almost all content is simple perlin noise generation that looks kind of correct but ultimately produces total nonsense (so any further derived rules have to also be total nonsense) — generally constrained with further nonsense rules to produce higher level concepts like “animals” and “biomes” that can’t be touched meaningfully.
Other material I can find is far too involved, and far too slow — targeting actual simulation of the earth. The few that do it with the goal of “just realistic enough” still end up being 10+ minutes generation time for small worlds. Modeling erosion processes being the main culprit, afaict.
Definitely stealing this one, for all my nefarious deeds.
In the end I just downloaded some data for the Earth and went about seeing how well I could replicate climate maps with some simple curve fitting in a Jupyter notebook. After some trial and error, I was surprised to find that you could actually approximate things quite well with sine curves and some blurring, as described in the article.
Overall I learnt a lot about Earth systems from this project, it was a fun hobby for a few months. I have some ideas for taking it further, but haven't gotten around to it yet. Feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions, or want to discuss any ideas you have about it.
But given the right base parameters, I don’t think post-tectonics have the same problem — it’s harder to generate an invalid earth, where earth’s placement in the solar system/universe is hard coded.
“The appearance of plate tectonics on terrestrial planets is related to planetary mass, with more massive planets than Earth expected to exhibit plate tectonics. Earth may be a borderline case, owing its tectonic activity to abundant water”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics
It is just that there no objects in the solar system big enough to have plate tectonics. And we currently have no way of detecting them on exoplanets.
We have the oceans to thank for plate tectonics.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253303432_Are_Ocean...
Some really cool details in this blog post- I hadn't done anything complicated related to weather.
It also means that there is the potential to exploit the simulation, and take advantages of the corner cases - which may also get us shut down, but we would likely never know it happened, so it's almost without penalty.
Great movies, but may be seem somewhat dated if you're new to them as they're late 90's fare. I still love both of them.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Floor
[1]: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1089671-13th_floor
Bostrom's original paper (which proposed the "simulation hypothesis") doesn't define it properly that I can see.
It's a very late C20 / early C21 computer technology phrase - because we make models and simulations, and nest things in our computers, we think it is a meaningful concept about our universe.
How would we know our reality is a simulation, vs. e.g. an "alternate dimension"? Or something much subtler that we have no understanding of?
It won't be a "computer" simulation, and I doubt it'll be running on top of a turing machine. There'll be something more interesting and complex going on - perhaps metaphorically analogous to a simulation, but a richer, more alien thing than that.
All the world's a simulation,
and all the men and women merely objects.
They have destructors and constructors;
And each one in its run morphs poly times"GPGPU N-Body Particle-Particle Cosmological Simulations".
[Abstract: https://bit.ly/3rzDNLy]
[Results and poster: https://bit.ly/3BE2cEp]
Well done - very nice presentation!
PS: Do you have plots of your simulation results and Earth's natural mass density power spectrum along (simulation) time?