RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 58 of 221«125657585960220221»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
SpacepetcompanyDate: Monday, 30.11.2015, 06:08 | Message # 856
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
If I may ask, does the accretion disk model account for tidal interactions between the Black Hole and nearby bodies (such as in the case of binary systems in which one of the bodies is a black hole and the other is a blue star)? I'd imagine the accretion disk would be quite complex, if able to form in most cases at all.




To consider the Earth as the only populated world in infinite space is as absurd as to assert that in an entire field sown with millet, only one grain will grow.

— Metrodorus of Chios, 4th century BCE.
 
AzirphaeliDate: Monday, 30.11.2015, 13:29 | Message # 857
Space Tourist
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 32
Status: Offline
The discs are 2d right now, so this sort of thing wouldn't be possible.




~
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Monday, 30.11.2015, 15:09 | Message # 858
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Quote Spacepetcompany ()
If I may ask, does the accretion disk model account for tidal interactions between the Black Hole and nearby bodies

No, current accretion disk model is 2D, so they can model only thin, almost finished accretion. Fully volumetric render required some serious work.





 
EliamDate: Monday, 30.11.2015, 20:17 | Message # 859
Observer
Group: Users
France
Messages: 11
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
No, current accretion disk model is 2D, so they can model only thin, almost finished accretion. Fully volumetric render required some serious work.


Do you plan to implement "simili-volumetric" effect, like the one used for star corona, before fully 3D volumetric rendering ?
 
SalvoDate: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 18:59 | Message # 860
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
Quote Eliam ()
Do you plan to implement "simili-volumetric" effect, like the one used for star corona, before fully 3D volumetric rendering ?

I don't know if it's a good idea to apply the same method to accretion disks.

Star corona has a few different 3D planes with animated procedural texture, that gives the effect of "3D". Here you can't apply the same effect since you're looking at something flat, or... maybe you can, but I don't know if that would look nice.





The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.

CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs

(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)
 
EliamDate: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 19:53 | Message # 861
Observer
Group: Users
France
Messages: 11
Status: Offline
I used to use a lot Blender 3D software. Before implementation of volumetric rendering it was very frequent to use "billboards particle" to make fake volumetric rendering (as in old games). It could be really realistic. (example)
 
Tac1017Date: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 20:03 | Message # 862
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 167
Status: Offline
Just curious: if physics was going to be incorporated into the game, how long 2ould it take if progress began today?




The Terra Hunter of the Milky Way!

(By the way, I was born in 2001, NOT 1972 XD)
 
anonymousgamerDate: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 20:22 | Message # 863
World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 1011
Status: Offline
Quote Tac1017 ()
if physics


physics is a pretty general term, don't you think





Desktop: FX-8350 4.0 GHz, 8 GB DDR3 RAM, EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW 8 GB, 2 TB HDD, 24 inch 1920x1080 screen
Laptop: Core i5 480M 2.66 GHz (turbo 2.93), 8 GB DDR3 RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6550m 1 GB, 640 GB HDD, 17.3 inch 1600x900 screen
 
DenebStarFTWDate: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 21:09 | Message # 864
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Chile
Messages: 25
Status: Offline
Quote Tac1017 ()
if physics was going to be incorporated into the game


Its partially there though. Spaceships are interactive with a celestial body's gravity. But planets and other objects aren't gravitationaly interactive with themselves (As a Universe Sandbox type of physics, if that's what you're referring to)





- S T A Y -
 
Wicker1MDate: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 22:04 | Message # 865
Astronaut
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 55
Status: Offline
How difficult would it be to implement changes to the Kepler-10c world in the next patch to make it conform to what scientists believe Kepler-10c may actually be like? In patch .973, Kepler-10c is listed inaccurately as a hot ice giant. The real Kepler 10c is believed to be a rocky mega-Earth. Although Kepler 10c may have the mass of an ice giant, its density suggests that it is a solid rocky world.

Edited by Wicker1M - Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 22:06
 
Tac1017Date: Tuesday, 01.12.2015, 22:34 | Message # 866
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 167
Status: Offline
Quote DenebStarFTW ()
But planets and other objects aren't gravitationaly interactive with themselves (As a Universe Sandbox type of physics, if that's what you're referring to)


Exactly what I meant





The Terra Hunter of the Milky Way!

(By the way, I was born in 2001, NOT 1972 XD)
 
parameciumkidDate: Wednesday, 02.12.2015, 08:14 | Message # 867
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 277
Status: Offline
^ In that case I wouldn't expect it at all. Currently SpaceEngine has a heavy emphasis on realistic scales of both space and time, meaning two things: one, if anything were to gravitationally interact in any fashion that destabilized its orbit, in all probability it would have done so long, long before anyone got a spaceship there to catch it, or it would occur over a boringly long timescale; two, performing physics calculations on one simplified star system as in Universe Sandbox is easy (-ish) - performing the same sorts of calculations on billions upon billions of stars and planets is insane.
That said, who am I to put limits on SpaceEngineer's ambitions? He's surprised us before and might do so again... wink





Intel HD Graphics 4000 ;P
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Wednesday, 02.12.2015, 09:15 | Message # 868
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote parameciumkid ()
who am I to put limits on SpaceEngineer's ambitions? He's surprised us before and might do so again..


This is something I wouldn't hold my breath on.





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
 
niseminoshiroDate: Wednesday, 02.12.2015, 10:27 | Message # 869
Observer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 15
Status: Offline
Quote Wicker1M ()
In patch .973, Kepler-10c is listed inaccurately as a hot ice giant. The real Kepler 10c is believed to be a rocky mega-Earth. Although Kepler 10c may have the mass of an ice giant, its density suggests that it is a solid rocky world.

I think I heard somewhere that SE makes all planets above a certain size into ice or gas giants. It probably needs a few more categories like Shallow Neptune/Saturn, Desert Giant, Cannonball (iron) variations, carbon variations, and scorched all the way to frozen variations of those. Probably some interesting Terra-like types too (Large terra with hydrogen and/or helium atmo anyone?) A planet forming in an area where a lot of stars have died might be rich in heavy elements and exotic combinations of those. When the James Webb Space Telescope is launched in Oct 2018 we will probably learn a bit more about planet formation. I would think that a few more planet variations have yet to be discovered.
 
LookAtDatDakkaDate: Wednesday, 02.12.2015, 14:27 | Message # 870
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 156
Status: Offline
Quote niseminoshiro ()
I think I heard somewhere that SE makes all planets above a certain size into ice or gas giants. It probably needs a few more categories like Shallow Neptune/Saturn, Desert Giant, Cannonball (iron) variations, carbon variations, and scorched all the way to frozen variations of those. Probably some interesting Terra-like types too (Large terra with hydrogen and/or helium atmo anyone?) A planet forming in an area where a lot of stars have died might be rich in heavy elements and exotic combinations of those. When the James Webb Space Telescope is launched in Oct 2018 we will probably learn a bit more about planet formation. I would think that a few more planet variations have yet to be discovered.


I agree! biggrin





NVIDIA 960 GTX 2048MB
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Page 58 of 221«125657585960220221»
Search: