RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 34 of 69«1232333435366869»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
General suggestions
Antza2Date: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:12 | Message # 496
World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
Finland
Messages: 1049
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
what if i used 3 eyed fish instead? would have my analogy would have been better?

Yes. A 3 eyed fish is a broad enough definition to actually be feasible. A clown as has to fit a very tight set of criteria, which makes it infinitely more unlikely to come into being on a different planet.





Go to antza2.deviantart.com for cool photos!
 
ElectricalEelDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:15 | Message # 497
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Kuwait
Messages: 33
Status: Offline
Quote Antza2 ()
Yes. A 3 eyed fish is a broad enough definition to actually be feasible. A clown as has to fit a very tight set of criteria, which makes it infinitely more unlikely to come into being on a different planet.


well if it makes you happy ill change my post
 
Antza2Date: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:18 | Message # 498
World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
Finland
Messages: 1049
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
well if it makes you happy ill change my post

I'm not asking you to change your post. I just pointed out a flaw in your logic.





Go to antza2.deviantart.com for cool photos!
 
ElectricalEelDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:20 | Message # 499
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Kuwait
Messages: 33
Status: Offline
Quote Antza2 ()
I wasn't asking you to change your post. I just pointed out a flaw in your logic.


na i chnaged it anyway since it makes my argument better
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:22 | Message # 500
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
woah,that sure does sound like you saying space is big enough to have anything


If you keep up this sarcastic mocking style of posting and misquoting I'm going to give you a break from posting for a week. This does nothing to further the discussion and is quite rude.

You should read what I said, quote it in context, and have a well thought out response. When you can do this I will give you a proper response.

Quote ElectricalEel ()
thats why i said that complex life on tidally locked planets could exist


I have a feeling you meant to say "couldn't" exist.

Quote ElectricalEel ()
i never denied the earth having complex life in hydrothermal vents or deep sea or volcanoes


No but you seem to be drawing some sort of false dichotomy between Earth and the rest of the universe. History and science have shown over and over again that things in nature tend to repeat themselves when the right conditions are met. If something exists on Earth then most likely such things exist in similar environments or comparative environments elsewhere. This is simply a statistical probability, no this doesn't mean if clowns exist on Earth they must exist elsewhere. These sorts of statements mean if something in the general sense exists here, then it might exist elsewhere. The only way to definitively prove something like this would be to go to these planets which we can't do and so we must make assumptions based on what we know and what we can infer.





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
 
WatsisnameDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:38 | Message # 501
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2611
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1405/1405.1025.pdf


This is not a reliable source, and the level of rigor and depth of literature review are extremely weak compared to an actual scientific journal article. Who is even the author and affiliation, and what journal was it published in? Arxiv is not an academic journal, it is a repository of papers which could have been submitted by anyone, without even peer review.

Your second and third links were actually much more credible, but I still strongly disagree with your conclusion that complex life cannot exist on a tidally locked planet. We do not know the answer to that question. We only have reasonable speculation as to what factors are beneficial or otherwise.





 
ElectricalEelDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:46 | Message # 502
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Kuwait
Messages: 33
Status: Offline
Quote DoctorOfSpace ()
If you keep up this sarcastic mocking style of posting and misquoting I'm going to give you a break from posting for a week. This does nothing to further the discussion and is quite rude.

You should read what I said, quote it in context, and have a well thought out response. When you can do this I will give you a proper response.


sorry if i sounded rude there

Quote DoctorOfSpace ()
No but you seem to be drawing some sort of false dichotomy between Earth and the rest of the universe. History and science have shown over and over again that things in nature tend to repeat themselves when the right conditions are met. If something exists on Earth then most likely such things exist in similar environments or comparative environments elsewhere. This is simply a statistical probability, no this doesn't mean if clowns exist on Earth they must exist elsewhere. These sorts of statements mean if something in the general sense exists here, then it might exist elsewhere. The only way to definitively prove something like this would be to go to these planets which we can't do and so we must make assumptions based on what we know.


we both know that we can only assume our statements are true so we can keep going back on forth until morning,i really have nothing to add to this argument other than agreeing with you,since extremeophile life does exsist on earth,it might exist somewhere else (which was your whole point) and i guess i was wrong thinking that complex life couldn't exist on tidally locked planets and shouldn't have made such broad and bold statements such as "game falsely claims that they have complex life"

(but was a ban threat really necessary? sad )

Added (08.03.2015, 14:46)
---------------------------------------------

Quote Watsisname ()
This is not a reliable source, and the level of rigor and depth of literature review are extremely weak compared to an actual scientific journal article. Who is even the author and affiliation, and what journal was it published in? Arxiv is not an academic journal, it is a repository of papers which could have been submitted by anyone, without even peer review.


i thought it was okay because it did include some resources at the bottom
 
WatsisnameDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:50 | Message # 503
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2611
Status: Offline
I wasn't really fond of your initial posting style either, but if you speak respectfully and show that you give critical thought to other people's comments you'll be fine.

Added:
Quote ElectricalEel ()
i thought it was okay because it did include some resources at the bottom


Of its sources, the strongest one (both in terms of quality and relevance to the subject matter) was
Climate Instability on Tidally Locked Exoplanets, which is an ApJ article (also one I've read a while back and referenced in an assignment I did at uni!). smile

It shows that there can be catastrophic climate changes and even atmospheric collapse on tidally locked worlds, but this is dependent on a number of parameters. It is indeed an important factor to consider for the habitability of locked worlds, but it would be wrong to conclude that all tidally locked worlds are inhospitable to complex life.





 
ElectricalEelDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 15:53 | Message # 504
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Kuwait
Messages: 33
Status: Offline
Quote Watsisname ()
I wasn't really fond of your initial posting style either, but if you speak respectfully and show that you give critical thought to other people's comments you'll be fine.


yea its just im new and im not yet adjusted to the etiquette of forums like these.

(because i mostly browse sites like youtube where most comments are inflammatory and disrespectful)
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 16:03 | Message # 505
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
but was a ban threat really necessary?


Less of a threat, more of a warning.

Make sure you read the forum rules
Quote Robbie ()
Communication in the forum is based on the principles of generally accepted morality and netiquette.

Quote Robbie ()
Please make an effort to communicate clearly using proper language so that others may understand you.

http://en.spaceengine.org/forum/8-180-1

Quote ElectricalEel ()
we both know that we can only assume our statements are true so we can keep going back on forth until morning


I have made no such assumptions nor do I plan to. I am simply explaining why SpaceEngine's life generation system is the way it is. There are far more fantastical things one could make an issue of instead of life on a tidally locked world, you know things like "aerial" and "exotic". There is no evidence to support any claims of exotic life being possible and yet it was added to SE. I support such things being added because they create diversity which leads to a better gameplay experience.

Quote ElectricalEel ()
i guess i was wrong thinking that complex life couldn't exist on tidally locked planets and shouldn't have made such broad and bold statements such as "game falsely claims that they have complex life"


You should also know that all terms in SE are intentionally ambiguous. "Multicellular" could mean anything from animal life to free floating algae. It is open to interpretation and the imagination of the user.





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
 
ElectricalEelDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 16:26 | Message # 506
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Kuwait
Messages: 33
Status: Offline
but will my suggestion be considered? which was to allow a filter setting to exclude any tidally locked planets

wouldn't have wanted to cause so much trouble for my suggestion to not be implemented biggrin
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 08.03.2015, 16:32 | Message # 507
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
which was to allow a filter setting to exclude any tidally locked planets


The only thing I can say is you can play around with the life probability settings already in the Universe.cfg file located in the config folder.

There isn't anything specific to tidally locked worlds but you may be able to get some settings you like. Once you start editing this stuff your planets will no longer match planets people might share. Backup your files before you start editing.

Code
// life probabilities settings
ProbLifeTerra           0.3  // probability of origin of life on terra
ProbLifeOceania         0.3  // probability of origin of life on oceania
ProbLifeDesert          0.02    // probability of origin of life on desert
ProbLifeIceWorld        0.05    // probability of origin of life on ice world (under ice)
ProbLifeTitan           0.1  // probability of origin of life on titan (exotic)
ProbLifeGiantOrg        0.01    // probability of origin of life on gas giant (floaters)
ProbLifeGiantExo        0.002    // probability of origin of life on gas giant (floaters)
ProbPanspEjectTerra     1.0  // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on terras (surface & ocean)
ProbPanspEjectOceania   0.01    // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on oceanias (ocean)
ProbPanspEjectDesert    1.0  // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on deserts (surface)
ProbPanspEjectIceWorld  0.005    // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on ice worlds (subglacial)
ProbPanspEjectTitanOrg  0.002    // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on titans (subglacial)
ProbPanspEjectTitanExo  1.0  // Probability of exotic  life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on titans (surface)
ProbPanspEjecGiantOrg   0.0001    // Probability of organic life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on gas giants (atmosphere)
ProbPanspEjectGiantExo  0.0001    // Probability of exotic  life spores ejection  on asteroid impact on gas giants (atmosphere)
ProbPanspInsertTerra    0.1  // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on terras (surface & ocean)
ProbPanspInserOceania   0.2  // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on oceanias (ocean)
ProbPanspInsertDesert   0.04    // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on deserts (surface)
ProbPanspInsertIceWorld 0.001    // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on ice worlds (subglacial)
ProbPanspInsertTitanOrg 0.0003    // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on titans (subglacial)
ProbPanspInsertTitanExo 0.08    // Probability of exotic  life spores insertion on asteroid impact on titans (surface)
ProbPanspInsertGiantOrg 0.05    // Probability of organic life spores insertion on asteroid impact on gas giants (atmosphere)
ProbPanspInsertGiantExo 0.05    // Probability of exotic  life spores insertion on asteroid impact on gas giants (atmosphere)
LifeOrgAgeUni           0.60    // mean value of system age to develop unicellular    organic life (in billion years)
LifeOrgAgeUniDisp       0.25    // dispersion of system age to develop unicellular    organic life (in billion years)
LifeOrgAgeMulti         3.50    // mean value of system age to develop multicellular  organic life (in billion years)
LifeOrgAgeMultiDisp     0.70    // dispersion of system age to develop multicellular  organic life (in billion years)
LifeOrgAgeComplex       4.00    // mean value of system age to develop complex ground organic life (in billion years)
LifeOrgAgeComplexDisp   0.50    // dispersion of system age to develop complex ground organic life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeUni           1.50    // mean value of system age to develop unicellular    exotic  life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeUniDisp       0.40    // dispersion of system age to develop unicellular    exotic  life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeMulti         4.50    // mean value of system age to develop multicellular  exotic  life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeMultiDisp     1.00    // dispersion of system age to develop multicellular  exotic  life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeComplex       6.50    // mean value of system age to develop complex ground exotic  life (in billion years)
LifeExoAgeComplexDisp   1.50    // dispersion of system age to develop complex ground exotic  life (in billion years)





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
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Monday, 09.03.2015, 11:41 | Message # 508
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Quote ElectricalEel ()
but will my suggestion be considered? which was to allow a filter setting to exclude any tidally locked planets
wouldn't have wanted to cause so much trouble for my suggestion to not be implemented


They will not be excluded. Life on tidally locked planets could exist, or could not - we don't know. There are a lot of scientific works which prove both possibilities. Climate on the planet depends very much on the atmosphere density and specific heat of the air. It is possible to have liquid oceans on both day and night hemisphere. So no, life on tidally locked planets will exist in SE.

You can filter them out in the Star browser by set up the parent sun to F or G main sequence class. Tidally locked planets are common on K and M class stars, because they have low luminosity and planet must orbit close to it to have Earth-like temperatures. And if you didn't setup the star class filter, you will have 80% chance to find a planet bear M-type star, just because they are most common in the Universe. So "tidally locked life" in SE is common not because of wrong probability or so, but just because M-dwarfs are common in the Universe.





 
DeathStarDate: Monday, 09.03.2015, 18:23 | Message # 509
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
Here's something minor that's been bugging me for some time. Take a look at this picture:

That picture was taken 44 KILOMETERS below the surface of an ocean. That's 4 times the depth of the deepest part of the Mariana Trench. And yet look at how bright everything is - it's like it was taken just a few meters beneath the surface.

I can't imagine that adding some sort of filter that darkens everything 200 meters below the surface or so would be complicated. Right now, this is quite immersion breaking on oceanias.

Attachments: 3479619.jpg(70Kb)
 
u3210Date: Monday, 09.03.2015, 23:03 | Message # 510
Observer
Group: Users
Hungary
Messages: 12
Status: Offline
Okay, so I was looking at this pic of Vesta,

and I thought a system that shows the size of, say 10 km on the screen in real time, would be neat.
Of course it wouldn't be just 10 km, but it could grow from, like 500 meters to several hundred kilometers (for gas giants maybe even more). I can't really explain it right now, I'm too tired, but imagine something, like in Google Maps.
Looking away from the selected object shouldn't be a problem, because the HUD would still show the details of the selected planet/moon/asteroid/whatever, so nobody could think when he selects a planet then looks at its moon, that the information represents the moon (which is not selected), and not the planet (which is selected).
Sorry for the long lines, you've probably understood what I wanted to say after you've seen the picture. Anyway, I hope you all have a nice day! happy

Attachments: 0244356.jpg(234Kb)


Edited by u3210 - Sunday, 29.03.2015, 10:07
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
Page 34 of 69«1232333435366869»
Search: