RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 160 of 221«12158159160161162220221»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
NantesDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 13:02 | Message # 2386
Observer
Group: Newbies
Brazil
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
Edit: bug report removed, I was wrong

Quote
Any plans to add rogue planets?


Interesting idea at first sight, but they would be basically invisible. They would be too far away from any star on average to be bright enough to be noticeable. What would be the statistical chance of you randomly clicking somewhere in space and finding a rogue planet? Otherwise they'd be impossible to find, and thus pointless to include.


Edited by Nantes - Monday, 25.04.2016, 14:10
 
ksgDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 13:19 | Message # 2387
Observer
Group: Newbies
Finland
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
Quote Nantes ()
There is nothing at the center of those two planets that could justify their almost-circular orbit around that point. Perhaps I just found evidence for dark matter?


The center point is the system's barycenter; it's sort of the system's collective center of mass. This point is what any system's objects, planetary and stellar scale alike, orbit around, just in most cases the point is inside a more massive object, rendering it almost static, while the less massive objects orbit around it.

Here's a Wikipedia article explaining this in more depth and a less messy and confusing manner
 
[DW]SolarisDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 13:29 | Message # 2388
Observer
Group: Newbies
United Kingdom
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
Right, new bug.
i keep getting a CTD. first time, it was when i was inside Saggitarius A, and trying to leave.
second time, i don't know what I was doing.
Third time, I was on a planet in a globular cluster near the milky way, using shift drag to zoom in.
fourth time was exactly the same.
however, neither of them happened immidiately, more like 4/10 seconds after i reach max zoom level.





In the beginning was the word,
And the word was "Arrrgh!"
- Piraticus, 13:7
 
FaceDeerDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 16:50 | Message # 2389
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Canada
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
Quote Nantes ()
Interesting idea at first sight, but they would be basically invisible. They would be too far away from any star on average to be bright enough to be noticeable. What would be the statistical chance of you randomly clicking somewhere in space and finding a rogue planet? Otherwise they'd be impossible to find, and thus pointless to include.


Brown dwarfs and black holes (without accretion disks) are also effectively invisible. One doesn't find them by randomly clicking around in the sky, one finds them via the star browser. Presumably if rogue planets were added some sort of similar browser-based method would be used to find them (given that there could be more rogue planets out there than there are stars I imagine they would not be included in the default browser view - perhaps a filter of some sort would be used).
 
hanvulansiaDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 21:16 | Message # 2390
Observer
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 13
Status: Offline
Quote Nantes ()
Interesting idea at first sight, but they would be basically invisible. They would be too far away from any star on average to be bright enough to be noticeable. What would be the statistical chance of you randomly clicking somewhere in space and finding a rogue planet? Otherwise they'd be impossible to find, and thus pointless to include.

Space Engine claims to be a realistic simulator of the universe. That's enough reason for including them. We've already found rogue planets with our telescopes.


Edited by hanvulansia - Sunday, 24.04.2016, 21:17
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 24.04.2016, 21:32 | Message # 2391
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Regarding rogue planets and everything else known to modern astronomy

Quote SpaceEngineer ()
as long as SE is a scientifically accurate Universe simulator, then one day it will implement ALL space objects and phenomenon that are known to modern astronomy (if this would be possible to implement on the personal computers). So you may not bother yourself with questions like "will SE one day have meteor rain implemented". I guarantee that it WILL.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
hanvulansiaDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 07:42 | Message # 2392
Observer
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 13
Status: Offline
I've upgraded my graphic card to a gtx 750 ti and now this version works, but I've found some bugs:

- Stars dissapear with my screen's native resolution (1440x900) but they show perfectly with any other resolution. I've tried erasing cache and restarting. The star is still there but all I see is an empty hole. This don't happen with brown dwarves or other bodies.

- Clouds work rare sometimes, they go inside the terrain (or it feels like) and it's ugly. Sometimes they become circles in the planet, it dissapears when finishing loading. (also, I think clouds should have a more natural looking in the future, their pattern looks so artificial sometimes)

- Textures go suddenly ultra-low, and then it goes normal again in a second. Especially when moving the planet with mouse right click. This is not an important bug but it's kinda ugly when happens.

- This one has been reported surely, cyclons suddenly cuttoff, especially in gas giants. Also all of them look the same.

And this is not a bug, but I've noticed it: For some reason atmospheres require a lot of resources. Maybe it's normal, but when disabling them I get an extra 20fps (that's a lot!), while disabling other things doesn't have that much impact (maybe auroras are too demanding too).

The rest works just fine. The new "slow" camera moving is a bit annoying, but nothing important. This will be one of the best SE releases!
 
steeljaw354Date: Monday, 25.04.2016, 11:43 | Message # 2393
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Is there a possibility for rogue terras?
 
MosfetDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 12:34 | Message # 2394
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 728
Status: Offline
you're kidding right?




"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
NantesDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 12:38 | Message # 2395
Observer
Group: Newbies
Brazil
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
Quote ksg ()
The center point is the system's barycenter; it's sort of the system's collective center of mass. This point is what any system's objects, planetary and stellar scale alike, orbit around, just in most cases the point is inside a more massive object, rendering it almost static, while the less massive objects orbit around it.


If both planets were orbiting on each other, it would look a lot different. But the way it is in the picture, with the circular orbits being so close to each other, and with the barycenter far from either planet, is compatible with a third, more massive body at the center. But there clearly is none.

If they were orbiting on each other, one of them would occupy the center of orbit or close to it, like Pluto is doing in the gif of the Wikipedia article you pointed out.


Edited by Nantes - Monday, 25.04.2016, 12:47
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 13:42 | Message # 2396
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8714
Status: Offline
Quote Nantes ()
But the way it is in the picture, with the circular orbits being so close to each other, and with the barycenter far from either planet, is compatible with a third, more massive body at the center.

No, you're wrong. VERY wrong. Where the barycenter is located relative to the objects is simply a function of their relative mass. If they have nearly equal mass, the barycenter will be almost exactly between them. If they have very unequal mass, the barycenter will be closer to one object than the other.





All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
 
MosfetDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 13:47 | Message # 2397
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 728
Status: Offline
As much as counter-intuitive it seems, I don't see nothing wrong in those orbits. Those planets have comparable mass, and their semi-major axis is a consequence of it. Their relative distance is conserved, they're effectively "falling" one towards the other.
If there were an object in place of the barycenter the total mass of the system would be different, and so the orbits and relative orbital velocities.
But maybe I've missed something.

Edit: oops, second biggrin





"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram


Edited by Mosfet - Monday, 25.04.2016, 13:48
 
NantesDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 14:05 | Message # 2398
Observer
Group: Newbies
Brazil
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
My bad guys, I just realized, after going back to SpaceEngine and time-forwarding the simulation, that both planets orbit the barycenter at exactly the same relative speed, meaning they're always perfectly opposite to each other in the orbit. I was under the impression that their speeds were different, so that they'd get very close to each other eventually, invalidating their circular orbit. I should have watched the orbit in time carefully before reporting it. Sorry!

Edited by Nantes - Monday, 25.04.2016, 14:09
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 14:55 | Message # 2399
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Followed link to Wikipedia about binary planets, surfing few linked pages, and found an article about interesting object - plutino 1999 TC36. This is triple asteroid consists of two almost identical 300 km-wide asteroids and further 130 km-sized "moon". Added them to SE:



There are a lot of other binary/multiple asteroids knows in the Solar system. Adding all of them could be a good community addon. Good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor-planet_moon

Attachments: 6380320.jpg(89Kb)





 
JackDoleDate: Monday, 25.04.2016, 15:25 | Message # 2400
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1737
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
plutino 1999 TC36. This is triple asteroid consists of two almost identical 300 km-wide asteroids and further 130 km-sized "moon". Added them to SE:

For people who do not want to wait for the next SE version. But it looks a bit different.


Attachments: 8680244.jpg(185Kb) · 1999_TC36.sc(1Kb)





Don't forget to look here.

 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Page 160 of 221«12158159160161162220221»
Search: