🧀🐭Results❓

Yes, indeed—the hypothesis we created was true, and we could accept/solve it because, at the end of the simulation, all rats were infected by the dangerous bacteria since they were not cured, which led to physical and behavioral changes in them. This result can prove and answer about the fact that experiment is able to explain:

If the rat exposures remain unchanged (if the bacteria spread around the rats continues), then the risk will be more dangerous, and it eventually may spread dangerous bacteria to the rats and cause their physical and behavioral changes—aw squeak!

What we discovered from using the simulation is that the spread of infection is dependent on the number of infected rats, their interactions with the uninfected rats, and the environment (bushes). Once the bacteria spreads, it quickly spreads not only directly (rat-to-rat) but also indirectly through green bushes (the environment). The simulation can, of course, relate to real life because it represents how an infection or virus can spread in populations. Lastly, the point that turned out to be expected was, obviously, if there are more infected rats, then the faster the population of rats will be infected. However, the unexpected thing we found out is that during the simulation, some healthy rats survived longer than expected (fur real?). This is possibly due to the fact of random movement caused by the infected rats or them not encountering infected individuals or bushes.