Can I use it to solve Rubik's Cube?

Oooh I love Clifford Algebra! The way it unified things I thought were entirely separate blew my mind, I forget where I was introduced to it though. Looking forward to checking out your video here

I'm 15m in and you haven't mentioned it yet, so I guess that was a bad hunch! 😂

22m you mentioned Rubik's Cubes! Yay

I'll back your crowdfunder

Haha, thanks but I can't promise Rubik's cube related features

😞

Great to have an ambitious roadmap, but I'd consider it a good goal and good success to get the GA on Wikipedia (step 2)!

Here's an intro link I found by Webmeister Joe Gregorio:

https://bitworking.org/news/ga/2d/

.. while we're waiting for you to deliver!

The current best intro (certainly if you're a programmer), which has nice interactive parts, is this https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/ and this is good too https://youtu.be/tX4H_ctggYo?t=1082

Still, neither of them are accessible to a high school student 😄

But thanks so much for watching it Duncan 😁

Well to come clean, I always watch YouTube on 2x speed and am ready with the right/left arrows to skip the formal bits and sections that are less interesting!

But, really watchable presentational style and an inspiring project that I'll be following, as a noob in 3D that wants to get better!

Just the first two steps on the roadmap would be :awesome:

I know right 😄

I also just skimmed this (I'm "time-constrained", alas), but I love the goals and all the references you're drawing on. (It seems like you have a taste for indie games — Mushroom 11 as an example!? — you're in good company here.)

I've been learning a bit about GA and Clifford algebras, by way of Eric Lengyel's https://foundationsofgameenginedev.com book, Cohl Furey's attempt to unify GR/QM, etc. It seems really neat, and I'd be thrilled to see someone apply GA to a simulation-building environment. It feels like a really natural fit.

On the goal of making an editor plugin... note that the Luna folks tried this, and it seems like something they https://medium.com/@enso_org/enso-dev-blog-19th-june-2020-335e528d50b after the fact.

Is there a section of your talk that I missed where you discuss whether or not to go with a purely visual editor rather than some sort of text hybrid? I'd like to know your thoughts about that tradeoff.

Mushroom 11 is made by friends of mine, Itay and Julia! If you have not already you should watch Itay's GDC presentations where he talks about game design, they are absurdly well-presented and insightful

I am currently working on a standalone editor so I won't encounter the Enso team's problems. The reason I am considering a plugin as well is that even if the editor succeeds beyond my wildest dreams, people will still want to see the ideas combined with the ordinary way of doing stuff. The plugin will probably only have a subset of the features of the full editor, but I feel there might be low-hanging fruit. But yes I might not do it at all!

A text hybrid might be a better idea. But see here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrDZ--AuiL8 for discussion of why I think, well... that there's a real gap for people trying to see what you can do with software with no text at all, if only to see what happens. That talk is about games, so I may have to give a separate talk answering your question. Suffice to say that the whole point of the mixed reality discussion in the GA video is to create a direct connection between the reality of the mathematical system and people's thoughts; I would say symbols are a lossy channel

https://youtu.be/VM7jCOeVte8 the GDC talk referenced (i think)

That one is great but they have others, probably you need to search the GDC vault

"It's difficult to get cultural change in physics" is a bit of an understatement, but I wish you success! :)

How about we organize a public 2h session in which I demo and you can ask questions?

I would be interested in this!