ENG New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 47 of 70«1245464748496970»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
General suggestions
PlutonianEmpireDate: Tuesday, 09.02.2016, 06:50 | Message # 691
Pioneer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 475
Status: Offline
Would it be possible to give ships an internal gyroscope, in the sense that if the ship is in orbit around the planet, and the user sets the prograde or horizon button for example, the ship will automatically maintain the requested relative orientation without having to fire thrusters every two seconds?




Specs: Dell Inspiron 5547 (Laptop); 8 gigabytes of RAM; Processor: Intel® Core™ i5-4210U CPU @ 1.70GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.4GHz; Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit; Graphics: Intel® HD Graphics 4400 (That's all there is :( )

Edited by PlutonianEmpire - Tuesday, 09.02.2016, 06:52
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Tuesday, 09.02.2016, 07:38 | Message # 692
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
Quote JackDole ()
Will there be a function in the foreseeable future, with which one can update a script in SpaceEngine during operation?

This is impossible in current engine architecture. It require fully dynamic internal database structure.

Quote PlutonianEmpire ()
Would it be possible to give ships an internal gyroscope, in the sense that if the ship is in orbit around the planet, and the user sets the prograde or horizon button for example, the ship will automatically maintain the requested relative orientation without having to fire thrusters every two seconds?

This will be in the future, but now it's more easy to repeat prograde comment each few seconds.





 
JackDoleDate: Tuesday, 09.02.2016, 09:13 | Message # 693
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
This is impossible in current engine architecture. It require fully dynamic internal database structure.

That I was afraid of. sad

The thought came to me afterwards that SpaceEngine then would try every time to re-read the entire database, and that the import of a single script probably would be very complicated.



Would it be possible to create a function that makes an object 'invisible'?
Something like: 'NoVisible true'?

That this switch then for a specific object could be set to 'NoVisible false' with a console command. And vice versa.

Would something like this be very complicated?





Don't forget to look here.



Edited by JackDole - Tuesday, 09.02.2016, 09:41
 
CanleskisDate: Thursday, 18.02.2016, 22:01 | Message # 694
Space Pilot
Group: Users
France
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
I have a suggestion and this is something I would really like to see. I don't know why, but I have some troubles to determinate the distance between two things in Space Engine, I assume it is not an unnatural thing because of the vastness of the universe, but when for example I am on a mountain on a planet, I cannot determinate the distance with this mountain and another one, it confused me so much that I can't really appreciate the landscape sad The thing I would really like to see is similar to what Outerra does, the game (or the engine actually) shows the distance between you and another place according to the placement of the crosshair. Here's some examples:









I don't really know if it is possible for the moment to make somethink like this in Space Engine, but I think that's a good idea and could help me and maybe everyone if I am not the only person having this weird sensation wacko
One last question by the way, why does the Moon looks much bigger in Outerra than in Space Engine whereas they are at the same distance? (of course with the same FOV, I tested it)

Attachments: 2560421.jpg(246Kb) · 3459100.jpg(443Kb) · 7396125.jpg(322Kb) · 8309686.png(258Kb)


Edited by Canleskis - Thursday, 18.02.2016, 22:05
 
quarior14Date: Friday, 19.02.2016, 14:22 | Message # 695
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
With the new update of Space Engine, you can choose the unit of the atmosphere so I suggest if you can also with gravity or there will be either g or N·m²·kg−2 or m^3·kg−1·s^−2.
Reminder : 1 g = 9.81 N·m²·kg^−2

Also, is that it is possible to display the "surface" gravity event horizon or surface of the tidal force by distance of black holes ?
Screenshot (sorry, it is French) :


Also, what is a way for to docking automatically because it already has auto-pilot to reach a destination.

Attachments: 2923514.png(91Kb)





Quarior

Edited by quarior14 - Friday, 19.02.2016, 20:19
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Saturday, 20.02.2016, 08:12 | Message # 696
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
Quote Canleskis ()
shows the distance between you and another place according to the placement of the crosshair. Here's some examples:

This is not easy to implement in SE.

Quote quarior14 ()
Also, is that it is possible to display the "surface" gravity event horizon or surface of the tidal force by distance of black holes ?

I don't understand, please make correct sentence.

Quote quarior14 ()
Also, what is a way for to docking automatically because it already has auto-pilot to reach a destination.

Automatic docking is not implemented yet. Using cheats (EnableCheats true) it is possible to dock instantly.





 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 20.02.2016, 11:20 | Message # 697
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Quote quarior14 ()
Reminder : 1 g = 9.81 N·m²·kg^−2


You are confusing the units of "g" (acceleration due to gravity at Earth's surface, which averages 9.81 m/s2), with "G" (the gravitational constant, 6.67*10-11 N*m2/kg2).

I don't understand your suggestion or questions either. If you're asking if it's possible to show the surface gravity of a black hole (at its horizon), then this is a meaningless quantity. In some respects it is infinite.

If you're asking if it's possible to show the tidal forces from a black hole, this is already shown, in units of g per meter. You can consider a tidal force stronger than (very roughly) 10g/m to be lethal.





 
CanleskisDate: Saturday, 20.02.2016, 19:18 | Message # 698
Space Pilot
Group: Users
France
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
This is not easy to implement in SE.


This is what I expected, thanks for the answer but I hope it will be implemented one day smile
 
quarior14Date: Wednesday, 24.02.2016, 15:49 | Message # 699
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
Quote Watsisname ()
Quote quarior14 ()
1 g = 9.81 N·m²·kg^−2

You are confusing the units of "g" (acceleration due to gravity at Earth's surface, which averages 9.81 m/s2), with "G" (the gravitational constant, 6.67*10-11 N*m2/kg2).I don't understand your suggestion or questions either. If you're asking if it's possible to show the surface gravity of a black hole (at its horizon), then this is a meaningless quantity. In some respects it is infinite.If you're asking if it's possible to show the tidal forces from a black hole, this is already shown, in units of g per meter. You can consider a tidal force stronger than (very roughly) 10g/m to be lethal.

Yes, it is in fact N.kg^-1 but what is the relationship between the strength of the tidal force (g/m) ?
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Quote quarior14 ()
Also, is that it is possible to display the "surface" gravity event horizon or surface of the tidal force by distance of black holes ?

I don't understand, please make correct sentence.

I use with the following formula :
g = (G*m)/d²
g in N.kg^-1 (gravity)
G = 6.67*10^(-11) N.m²/kg² (gravitational constant)
m in kg (mass)
d in m (distance)
Exemple for Sagittarius A* (Mass : 4.31*10^6 * 1.977*10^(30) = 8.5769*10^(36) kg, Radius (event horizon) : 0.085 AU = 1.27*10^(10) m) :
g = (6.67*10^(-11)*8.5769*10^(36))/(1.27*10^(10))² = 1.29*10^47 N.kg^-1 = 1.31*10^46 g
I hope you understand, I do not know how to describe further, d it is the distance between camera and the center of black hole.





Quarior

Edited by quarior14 - Wednesday, 24.02.2016, 15:50
 
Kubacki99Date: Friday, 26.02.2016, 22:06 | Message # 700
Observer
Group: Newbies
Poland
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
Is it possible to add some function, which shows selected star on the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram?
 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 27.02.2016, 01:28 | Message # 701
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Quote quarior14
Yes, it is in fact N.kg^-1 but what is the relationship between the strength of the tidal force (g/m) ?


Correct, or just m/s2. Acceleration due to gravity is independent of the mass, so why use force per mass?

Tidal force is the change in force of gravity with respect to distance. To calculate it with Newton's Laws:

g(d)-g(d+Δd)=GM(1/d2-1/(d+Δd)2)

Quote quarior14 ()
Exemple for Sagittarius A* (Mass : 4.31*10^6 * 1.977*10^(30) = 8.5769*10^(36) kg, Radius (event horizon) : 0.085 AU = 1.27*10^(10) m) :
g = (6.67*10^(-11)*8.5769*10^(36))/(1.27*10^(10))² = 1.29*10^47 N.kg^-1 = 1.31*10^46 g


Uhh, check your math. You should be getting something like 3.5*106m/s2, or about 360,000 times Earth's surface gravity. Also, since event horizon radius (of a Schwarzschild black hole) is 2GM/c2, you can calculate it as
g(event horizon) = c4/(4GM)

However, this calculation is wrong. It's using Newton's laws in a *very* general relativistic regime. The result suggests you could hover at the event horizon if you accelerate upward with finite acceleration. This is wrong. The acceleration needed would actually be infinite. Only photons or other massless particles moving at the speed of light can remain on the horizon.

So... I wouldn't use this calculation. There are other interpretations of "surface gravity" of a black hole that mimic it (particularly in how it depends on the mass of the hole), but it's really not the same thing.

Similarly, the calculation of tidal force given above isn't completely accurate near a black hole. SE calculates it general relativistically (at least I'm pretty sure) from the space-time curvature.

Edit: Sorry, quoted wrong person.





 
quarior14Date: Saturday, 27.02.2016, 10:04 | Message # 702
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
Quote Watsisname ()
Correct, or just m/s². Acceleration due to gravity is independent of the mass, so why use force per mass?

It is the unity international.
Quote Watsisname ()
Uhh, check your math. You should be getting something like 3.5*10^6 m/s²

Ah yes, i forget the square, it is g = (6.67*10^(-11)*8.5769*10^(36))/(1.27*10^(10))² = 3546898.32 m/s² (or N/kg) = 361559.4618 g
Quote Watsisname ()
g(event horizon) = c^4/(4GM)

M = 8.5769*10^(36) kg
c = 299 792 458 m/s
G = 6.67*10^(-11) N.m²/kg²
g(event horizon) = (299792458)^4/(4*6.67*10^(-11)*(8.5769*10^(36)) = 3529934.443 m/s² = 359830.2185 g
Damn, it looks like my previous result.
In fact what is strange is that when the distance is 0 as gravity takes infinite + from the relationship (watch over limit in mathematics) to any body even if in reality, I'm not on it's realistic except for black hole I think.
Quote Watsisname ()
However, this calculation is wrong. It's using Newton's laws in a *very* general relativistic regime. The result suggests you could hover at the event horizon if you accelerate upward with finite acceleration. This is wrong. The acceleration needed would actually be infinite. Only photons or other massless particles moving at the speed of light can remain on the horizon. So... I wouldn't use this calculation. There are other interpretations of "surface gravity" of a black hole that mimic it (particularly in how it depends on the mass of the hole), but it's really not the same thing.Similarly, the calculation of tidal force given above isn't completely accurate near a black hole. SE calculates it general relativistically (at least I'm pretty sure) from the space-time curvature.

I think there is beyond my knowledge so I do not know what to say.

PS : How do you put the other powers that ² because even by copy paste, put it as a figure "normal" (example 4) ?





Quarior

Edited by quarior14 - Saturday, 27.02.2016, 10:06
 
HarbingerDawnDate: Saturday, 27.02.2016, 17:59 | Message # 703
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
Quote quarior14 ()
How do you put the other powers that ² because even by copy paste, put it as a figure "normal" (example 4) ?

Code
10[sup]4[/sup] m/s[sup]2[/sup]

produces

104 m/s2





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


Edited by HarbingerDawn - Saturday, 27.02.2016, 18:00
 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 27.02.2016, 22:04 | Message # 704
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Quote quarior14 ()
Damn, it looks like my previous result.


Yeah, it should. smile It's the same formula, just expressed differently. It replaced distance with the event horizon radius.

Quote quarior14 ()
In fact what is strange is that when the distance is 0 as gravity takes infinite

Of course. The limit of 1/r2 as r goes to zero is infinity. If a black hole singularity is infinitely small, then it is infinitely attractive at that point.

Quote quarior14 ()

I think there is beyond my knowledge so I do not know what to say.


Basically all I am saying is that the formula for the force of gravity F=GMm/r2 (Newton's Law of Gravity) is not accurate near a black hole. We really need to use general relativity.





 
jacobaaronberubeDate: Sunday, 06.03.2016, 04:26 | Message # 705
Observer
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 11
Status: Offline
When I went into the black hole (https://gyazo.com/04d615b9f963c686158398a57defad63) It wasnt what I was expecting, the rings are too bright, and theres no way to change that other than changing exposure, It would be cool to have a ring editor where we can add multiple rings with different offsets to the same body, as well as an array of other features like brightness, JPG file importation, thickness... etc Note: I am SO glad (yet super scared) that I can go IN the black hole, and make it almost impossible to get out :P that was some good coding guys! Last thing: You should add seperate tabs for searching for different types of bodies, like, lets say I want to look for black holes, BAM, theres a tab for it, AND lets say I want to find an asteroid, BAM; another tab... you get the deal... I hope you read this... This game has sparked my imagination by a LOT... I'm glad you're working on this game :P (I know... I shouldnt get mushy and crap... and that I should only post comments about the game in the misc section, but... chances are you wont read this there...)
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
Page 47 of 70«1245464748496970»
Search: