Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!ucsd!nosc!crash!pro-gateway.cts.com!bill
From: bill@pro-gateway.cts.com (Bill Long, SysOp)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Accrete
Message-ID: <6023@crash.cts.com>
Date: 2 Dec 90 03:36:09 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Lines: 27

In-Reply-To: message from neufeld@physics.utoronto.ca

>   Question: I noticed that the first eight simulations I ran came out
>pretty well the same. In particular, the primary's mass never changed. I
>found out that the program always came up with the first seed either
>-17095 or -17094. Subsequent seeds may have been similar from run to run
>also. I've taken to running a one line random number generator to

Same here. Except mine seems to always come up with three 0's and then a
non-zero number.

>>    I'm surprised it takes so long on a //c  I'm running it on my GS, and it
>>takes about 30 minutes on average per simulation.  This is at the standard
>>2.8 MHz clock speed.  From that figure, a 1-MHz machine should finish it in
>>about 90 minutes or so.
>>
>   That's the same time as it took on my machine (an unaccelerated GS).

Yep, 30 mins sounds about right for my GS. I also ran it on a IIe
(unenhanced, unaccelerated) and it took about 1:30. Sounds good to me...

| ProLine: bill@pro-gateway
|Internet: bill@pro-gateway.cts.com
|    UUCP: crash!pro-gateway!bill
|    ARPA: crash!pro-gateway!bill@nosc.mil
|  BITNET: bill%pro-gateway.cts.com@nosc.mil
+----------"Maturity is overrated" - Garfield-------->Pro-Gateway 214/644-5113