> here's where i am but you're just going to tell me i'm wrong without > letting me understand it. you don't like my interest in finding what's > possible > > # the collision point is the earliest intersection of > the swept-sphere paths the two spheres travel on > # selfdot(pos1+vel1*t) = rsquared > # selfdot(pos2+vel2*t) = rsquared > # selfdot(touchpt - (pos1 + vel1*t)) = rsquared > # selfdot(touchpt - (pos2 + vel2*t)) = rsquared > # simpler is to compare their distances to the sum of > their radii (inhibition forced us to look up on the internet >( ) > # selfdot(pos1 + vel1*t, pos2 + vel2*t) = 4rsquared > # even simpler is to consider one the reference frame > for the other > # selfdot(pos12+vel12*t) = 4rsquared > # sum(pos12)**2 + sum(pos12*vel12)*t + sum(vel12)**2*t > # it's a quadratic equation where A = sum(vel12)**2, B > = sum(pos12*vel12), and C = sum(pos12) > # the quadratic equation is (-B +- sqrt(B^2-4AC))/(2A) > # so it's immediately rational from A, meanwhile you'd > need B^2-4AC to be a square number or a rational of square numbers
i'm starting to understand myself around it a little it looks like it's not reasonable to make B^2-4AC a square number, and very hard to make it a rational of square numbers in a way that doesn't cause precision explosion and that's really similar to something being impossible, and contains a space where it's possible that it's impossible and impossibility is a huge projected/introjected inhibition i have, associated with hopelessness and worthlessness and suicide and harm to my loved ones and stuff so i try not to develop concepts of impossibility. it's been quite nice to have reversed that
