Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 81 of 221«127980818283220221»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
SpaceEngineerDate: Saturday, 09.01.2016, 21:47 | Message # 1201
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4795
Status: Offline
Quote Giordie85 ()
They look too big, too "solid", too dark, and the spin is too slow. At least, the spin velocity would increase as matter approaches the event horizon.

Wellcome to the reality smile By the way, now in SE disks are too small, too cold and too thin compared to real disks. This is because of limitations of the rendering system. It will be fixed in future eventually. Real accretion disks are up to 100 million degrees hot, otherwhelmingly bright and giant.

Rotation speed near black hole is close to realistic, because it is computed using relativistic formulae. If you think what disk rotation is too slow, look at black hole radius and think about linear speed of the matter: it is close to the speed of light.

Accretion disk in Interstellar is far from realistic. It is too small, too thin and too cold. This is made by writer to allow existence of planets near it, and to allow characters to cross event horizon in a ship without being evaporized billion kilometers away from the black hole.





 
quarior14Date: Saturday, 09.01.2016, 22:04 | Message # 1202
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 642
Status: Offline
Is it can have blue accretions discs (because in my mod Pirate Galaxy (private at this time), there is an unstable wormhole with an accretion disk) and speaking of that, as it is the progress wormholes ?




Quarior
 
ZatSoloDate: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 10:14 | Message # 1203
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 111
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
ZatSolo, something very wrong is happen with your SE. If exe didn't see files in it's folder, this mean either it was not in the right place, or it's working folder is incorrect, or system doesn't allow it access to it's own folder. Make clean installation again, somewhere on disk D: where you have 100% read/write access.

SpaceEngineer, thank you for your help and sorry for your time spent about this "anomaly".

Today I will try with a new clean installation on an external HD. I will try first under Win7, then i will use the same installation under Windows XP (after cleaning the "cache" folder).

If under Win 7 does work and under Win XP doesn't, there are 2 possibility: 1) My Win XP has some problem (but only P08 doesnt work ... very strange) or Patch 08 has some problems under Win XP wink

I will let you know by this evening ... smile
 
n0b0dyDate: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 16:15 | Message # 1204
Explorer
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 297
Status: Offline
Quote Voekoevaka ()
This may be a catalog error : B1957+20 is 5 ly from the sun !


It's probably a typo in the catalog file. Based on this article it should be around ~5000 lys, not ~5. Otherwise we'd be in trouble biggrin
So I corrected the entry in BlackHoles.sc and upload it here. Just rename it to BlackHoles.sc and put it into your SE\catalogs\Catalogs0974.pak\stars\ substituting the old one.

Attachments: BlackHoles.sc(2Kb)
 
Giordie85Date: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 17:15 | Message # 1205
Observer
Group: Newbies
Italy
Messages: 8
Status: Offline
As far as I read until now, the general shape of the accretion disk of a stellar black hole would look SIMILAR to the Interstellar one (apart from its dimensions), like the one represented here:



I never said that the Interstellar one is the most realistic, it's not. I don't care about Interstellar, I don't even like the movie itself. The dimension of the accretion disk depends on the remaining gas and dust after the supernova, and in how much time the black hole can absorb them. There can be black holes without any disk, or black holes with gigantic disks. Anyway, I simply find the shape not much realistic. Ok, no one has ever seen a real stellar black hole's accretion disk, but there are physic rules that sharpen the various possibilities.
Apart from the engine's limitations, in these disks there are many shadows, which suggest that the disk's surface is irregular, while, instead, at those speeds near a black hole, it would be very flat, with its thickness raising as the distance from the black hole increases. Most of what it could be seen of the disk would be mainly the light emitted by the heating matter. Gigantic accretion disks, which would mainly form around supermassive black holes, would very likely be very thick and dusty on the borders (I saw that an user is working on that, he posted a photo some pages before in this thread, of a big dust torus in the outskirts of a black hole's accretion disk).

Maybe the only photo we have of what is the best candidate for a supermassive black hole's accretion disk is this one, of the galaxy NGC 4261:



About the supermassive black hole's rendering in SE, I found much better this one you posted before:



This is just meant to be a constructive critic, and I obviously can be wrong about something I said about this. I will never stop appreciating this unique application you're developing and I keep thinking you're doing an amazing job!
 
ZatSoloDate: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 19:36 | Message # 1206
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 111
Status: Offline
Quote ZatSolo ()
I watched inside se.log andit seems that the files contained in the .pak files aren't read. This happens only using XP.


Quote ZatSolo ()
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
ZatSolo, something very wrong is happen with your SE. If exe didn't see files in it's folder, this mean either it was not in the right place, or it's working folder is incorrect, or system doesn't allow it access to it's own folder. Make clean installation again, somewhere on disk D: where you have 100% read/write access.

... Today I will try with a new clean installation on an external HD. I will try first under Win7, then i will use the same installation under Windows XP (after cleaning the "cache" folder).

If under Win 7 does work and under Win XP doesn't, there are 2 possibility: 1) My Win XP has some problem (but only P08 doesnt work ... very strange) or 2) Patch 08 has some problems under Win XP

I will let you know by this evening ...


Well, I did exactly what I wrote above. I was "Administrator" and SE folder had "everyone : full control" as read/write rights.
No way. The result is always the same. sad
The content of the * .pak files is not read. This is the main problem using Windows XP

Using Windows 7 everything works perfectly.

I was wondering ... maybe someone else had the same problem using XP? wacko


Edited by ZatSolo - Sunday, 10.01.2016, 19:57
 
jhulet251271Date: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 20:45 | Message # 1207
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 1
Status: Offline
I'm not sure if it's normal, and my idea of black holes have been distorted by Interstellar, but my black holes are extremely bright, and I can only see the black sphere of the black hole when I zoom in really close. Here is an image of what my black holes look like.
Attachments: 3275920.jpg(295Kb)
 
InariusDate: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 21:34 | Message # 1208
Explorer
Group: Local Moderators
France
Messages: 236
Status: Offline
Quote jhulet251271 ()
I'm not sure if it's normal, and my idea of black holes have been distorted by Interstellar, but my black holes are extremely bright, and I can only see the black sphere of the black hole when I zoom in really close. Here is an image of what my black holes look like.


Actually, it depends on the black hole. You have several types of BH. Try to look for other BH and you will find other forms.
 
WatsisnameDate: Sunday, 10.01.2016, 21:56 | Message # 1209
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2608
Status: Online
jhulet251271, this is normal. Black hole accretion disks are profoundly bright in nature.

You can decrease the exposure and the thermal emission (Ctrl+F4) to help see the hole more clearly. There are also differences from one black hole to another. Try looking at RSC 0-5-4095-1096-6063-0-0-0 S*

Giordie85, there is much computational work on black hole accretion disks, including fully relativistic magneto-hydrodynamic simulations with GR, e.g. as seen here. I think that what SE shows is actually well representative of a magnetically arrested disk, though with the limitations like SpaceEngineer said. And yes, there would generally be a huge dust torus around the accretion disk as well.





 
parameciumkidDate: Monday, 11.01.2016, 16:38 | Message # 1210
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 277
Status: Offline
I'm continuing to love Patch 08 and so far everything works just great! There's of course some minor bugs here and there, but nothing horrific and no more crashes than usual. So mad props to SpaceEngineer, who continues to impress!

I do have a suggestion about accretion disks, and it's a little different from the last few. What it is is that I think they need motion blur, or at least some sort of fudged version of it. Huge accretion disks look fine, but with the small ones, at all but the absolute slowest of timescales, they spin so fast that, due to their imperfect radial symmetry, they look like they're jiggling back and forth. This sort of breaks immersion insofar as it doesn't look "natural". My suggested fix is to program the texture generator to increase the lengths of the little gas streaks based on the rotation rate, and make them into complete circles if necessary.

Also I occasionally get hiccups in the fancy black holes' environment maps, manifesting as lag or angular chunks of solid black, but this isn't major and usually goes away if I hold still for a second. Since it's probably related to my graphics card, don't panic about trying to fix this quickly (but please do keep it on the back burner for next time you're bored wink ).

Oh, and if I may make one more simple request: I recently tried out Universe Sandbox 2 and was impressed by the pulsar effect. While I'm sure their implementation isn't entirely realistic (particularly after seeing their black holes), and thus SpaceEngine would do it rather differently, perhaps now that black holes have had some attention it's time to give the pulsars some love too?
Sample image (and yes, this is the best one I could find, alas): https://i.ytimg.com/vi/X1hQa1In4IU/maxresdefault.jpg





Intel HD Graphics 4000 ;P

Edited by parameciumkid - Monday, 11.01.2016, 16:41
 
niledom17Date: Monday, 11.01.2016, 17:15 | Message # 1211
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 3
Status: Offline
What's up with the textures on the UI? https://www.dropbox.com/s/egnr0gq8phirkgk/scr00000.png?dl=0
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Monday, 11.01.2016, 18:17 | Message # 1212
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8711
Status: Offline
Quote niledom17 ()
What's up with the textures on the UI?

You must have done something wrong during installation.





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
 
ShadowRaikouDate: Tuesday, 12.01.2016, 14:14 | Message # 1213
Astronaut
Group: Users
India
Messages: 53
Status: Offline
Is it just me, or Titan has no surface? I know that in the current version there are no textures for Pluto, Charon and Ceres. Titan has a pure black surface all around. You can see this by disabling the atmosphere and clouds, or flying down to it.
 
KoshDate: Tuesday, 12.01.2016, 14:35 | Message # 1214
Space Tourist
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 29
Status: Offline
Yep! It appears Titan's surface is missing as well.
 
Spock1108Date: Tuesday, 12.01.2016, 15:19 | Message # 1215
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 38
Status: Offline
Titan's surface is one of my mod ... just download and install it from here, for now, as if it were a mod. :)

here





Sorry for my English! ;)

Edited by Spock1108 - Tuesday, 12.01.2016, 15:32
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress and public beta test - 0.9.7.4
Page 81 of 221«127980818283220221»
Search: