Skip to main content

Sierpinski tetrahedron

While ago, I have a blog about a template error. I finally finished it today. I made a Sierpinski tetrahedron generator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpinski_triangle
This time, I would like to learn OpenMesh (http://www.openmesh.org). I have my own mesh library, but usually I would like to solve a problem, so if there is a well developed open source library, I think it is better to switch to it. Figure 1 shows how to get consistent list of vertices by OpenMesh. Here, "consistent" means, I always would like to have the vertices indexed as in the Figure 1, up. For example, if O_1 and O_3 are exchanged, I have a problem to create a Sierpinski tetrahedron.

Figure 1: tetrahedron configuration


Figure2: creation rule 1
Figure 3: creation rule2


Actually, I don't know what is the best way to do that, I depends on the OpenMesh's face halfedge circulator. If anybody knows better way, please give me a comment. In my method, first I need to guarantee the input is a tetrahedron. This is done as following:

1. Pick one face, f0.

2. Get 1-ring neighbor faces of f0 by the face face circulator. Now    we have four faces (f0, f1, f2, f3). If we could not get four,    there is a boundary. But, a tetrahedron has no boundary, therefore    f0 is not a tetrahedron face.

3. For all {f0, f1, f2, f3}, get 1-ring neighbor faces and check    all are one of {f0, f1, f2, f3}. If we found an unknown face, this    is not a tetrahedron. Actually, f1, f2, f3 are obtained by f0's    face face circulator, therefore, we don't need to check the f0.

When we got a consistent vertex list, follow the Figure 2 and 3 rule to generate the Sierpinski tetrahedron. The OpenGL rendered result is shown in the following figures. This is nothing new and nothing complicated, but, I have not program anything related with a mesh, it was fun to do that.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why A^{T}A is invertible? (2) Linear Algebra

Why A^{T}A has the inverse Let me explain why A^{T}A has the inverse, if the columns of A are independent. First, if a matrix is n by n, and all the columns are independent, then this is a square full rank matrix. Therefore, there is the inverse. So, the problem is when A is a m by n, rectangle matrix.  Strang's explanation is based on null space. Null space and column space are the fundamental of the linear algebra. This explanation is simple and clear. However, when I was a University student, I did not recall the explanation of the null space in my linear algebra class. Maybe I was careless. I regret that... Explanation based on null space This explanation is based on Strang's book. Column space and null space are the main characters. Let's start with this explanation. Assume  x  where x is in the null space of A .  The matrices ( A^{T} A ) and A share the null space as the following: This means, if x is in the null space of A , x is also in the null spa

Gauss's quote for positive, negative, and imaginary number

Recently I watched the following great videos about imaginary numbers by Welch Labs. https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU?list=PLiaHhY2iBX9g6KIvZ_703G3KJXapKkNaF I like this article about naming of math by Kalid Azad. https://betterexplained.com/articles/learning-tip-idea-name/ Both articles mentioned about Gauss, who suggested to use other names of positive, negative, and imaginary numbers. Gauss wrote these names are wrong and that is one of the reason people didn't get why negative times negative is positive, or, pure positive imaginary times pure positive imaginary is negative real number. I made a few videos about explaining why -1 * -1 = +1, too. Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by pattern https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by climbing a mountain https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 But actually Gauss's insight is much powerful. The original is in the Gauß, Werke, Bd. 2, S. 178 . Hätte man +1, -1, √-1) nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar um

Why parallelogram area is |ad-bc|?

Here is my question. The area of parallelogram is the difference of these two rectangles (red rectangle - blue rectangle). This is not intuitive for me. If you also think it is not so intuitive, you might interested in my slides. I try to explain this for hight school students. Slides:  A bit intuitive (for me) explanation of area of parallelogram  (to my site, external link) .