Free planetarium

 
User avatar
Teterrimo
Observer
Observer
Posts: 14
Joined: 03 Dec 2016

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 07:41

SpaceEngineer wrote:
Salvo wrote:
Source of the post Whaat? This are huge news! Did you already start working on it or it is such an easy implementation that it can be ready in just a month? 

It could take less than a week, there are plenty of free astronomical code libraries exist for this.

Good good, i thought was like that ;) I hope to see the update very soon !
 
User avatar
Quarior
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 236
Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Location: Local Universe/Laniakea/Virgo SC/Local Group/Via Lactea/Orion–Cygnus Arm/Sol System/Gaia
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 11:39

It is planned for object and spacecraft/module can have a animated texture gif like a advertisement, traffic lights or other utilization ?
Also, the new class will be obsolete systems catalogs actual or it is compatible ?
 
User avatar
SpaceEngineer
Author of SpaceEngine
Author of SpaceEngine
Topic Author
Posts: 437
Joined: 17 May 2016
Location: Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 14:28

Old classes could be useful in scripts, for a backward compatibility. Engine can easily automatically translate old classes to the new ones, for example desert -> desertic rocky terra.
 
User avatar
Quarior
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 236
Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Location: Local Universe/Laniakea/Virgo SC/Local Group/Via Lactea/Orion–Cygnus Arm/Sol System/Gaia
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 14:41

SpaceEngineer wrote:
Old classes could be useful in scripts, for a backward compatibility. Engine can easily automatically translate old classes to the new ones, for example desert -> desertic rocky terra.

Nice, old catalogs are compatible. Thanks for this information.
 
User avatar
SpaceEngineer
Author of SpaceEngine
Author of SpaceEngine
Topic Author
Posts: 437
Joined: 17 May 2016
Location: Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 14:58

News about development now will be in a form of blog. This thread is for discussion.
 
Druidpc
Observer
Observer
Posts: 1
Joined: 13 Jul 2017

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 15:11

Fireinthehole wrote:
Druidpc wrote:
Do we have an estimated release date for this update? I'm hyped!

No.
Quarior wrote:
SpaceEngineer wrote:
Source of the post I planning to implement VSOP87/DE403 soon, and maybe release a quick patch for 0.980 with this feature only. Before the total solar eclipse in August.

Nice but when and where total solar eclipse in August ?

21st of August, visible in (only) the mainland USA.

Thanks. I'm kinda let down.  :(
 
User avatar
PlutonianEmpire
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 232
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Location: MinneSNOWta
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 16:14

The VSOP87 mechanics, do they include the gradual slowing of the Earth's rotation from the moon's tidal influences? For example, I manually calculated the Earth's new RotationPeriod to he 23.9347254 for my addon set 51 thousand years into the future. Would the Earth have a similar RotationPeriod witu VSOP87 after setting the game time to that date?

Edit:
SpaceEngineer wrote:
News about development now will be in a form of blog. This thread is for discussion.

Maybe one way to filter barycenters from the SS explorer would be to exclude barycenter points that go below a planet's surface for any amount of time (maybe radius + bumpheight for example) from being classified as a binary?
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 :( )
 
User avatar
HarbingerDawn
SE Team Member
SE Team Member
Posts: 315
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 16:37

PlutonianEmpire wrote:
Source of the post Maybe one way to filter barycenters from the SS explorer would be to exclude barycenter points that go below a planet's surface for any amount of time (maybe radius + bumpheight for example) from being classified as a binary?

No, mass ratio is the appropriate way to do this, otherwise Sun-Jupiter must be classed as binary.
Ryzen 7 1700 OC to 3.8 GHz, 32 GB DDR4 RAM, GTX 980 Ti 6144 MB VRAM
Posts on old forum: 8717
 
User avatar
problemecium
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 70
Joined: 30 Dec 2016

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 17:25

The Sun's and Jupiter's barycenter is outside the Sun? I never would have guessed considering their relative masses o_O
ᴩʀoʙʟᴇᴍᴇᴄɪᴜᴍ﹖
Formerly known as "parameciumkid."
 
User avatar
HarbingerDawn
SE Team Member
SE Team Member
Posts: 315
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 19:04

problemecium wrote:
The Sun's and Jupiter's barycenter is outside the Sun? I never would have guessed considering their relative masses o_O

Because you forget how far apart they are. Barycenter location is determined by a combination of mass ratio AND distance. This is why barycenter location alone is useless. Any pair of objects can have a barycenter located in open space if they're far enough apart.
Ryzen 7 1700 OC to 3.8 GHz, 32 GB DDR4 RAM, GTX 980 Ti 6144 MB VRAM
Posts on old forum: 8717
 
User avatar
kham132
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 36
Joined: 05 Nov 2016

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

24 Jul 2017 20:02

Will there be an option to switch between the new and old classification system?
 
User avatar
XBrain130
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 199
Joined: 26 Nov 2016
Location: Italy
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

25 Jul 2017 02:05

tbh I don't mind Earth and Moon being classified as a binary in SE, after all they still have the closest mass ratio of the major planets, plus they looks cool tegether in the system browser :)
SpaceEngine's Italian Discord server: https://discord.gg/NhQbEbC
 
User avatar
HarbingerDawn
SE Team Member
SE Team Member
Posts: 315
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

25 Jul 2017 04:00

XBrain130 wrote:
Source of the post they still have the closest mass ratio of the major planets

Just because they're the closest doesn't mean they're close enough to be classed as binary. Earth is nearly two orders of magnitude more massive than the Moon. Do you really think they should be binary?
Ryzen 7 1700 OC to 3.8 GHz, 32 GB DDR4 RAM, GTX 980 Ti 6144 MB VRAM
Posts on old forum: 8717
 
User avatar
XBrain130
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 199
Joined: 26 Nov 2016
Location: Italy
Contact:

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

25 Jul 2017 04:19

HarbingerDawn wrote:
XBrain130 wrote:
Source of the post they still have the closest mass ratio of the major planets

Just because they're the closest doesn't mean they're close enough to be classed as binary. Earth is nearly two orders of magnitude more massive than the Moon. Do you really think they should be binary?

I'm not saying that, I don't actually consider them a binary planet. I was just saying that I wouldn't mind.
SpaceEngine's Italian Discord server: https://discord.gg/NhQbEbC
 
User avatar
Fireinthehole
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 60
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Location: Sweden

Work progress - 0.9.8.1

25 Jul 2017 04:50

HarbingerDawn wrote:
XBrain130 wrote:
Source of the post they still have the closest mass ratio of the major planets

Just because they're the closest doesn't mean they're close enough to be classed as binary. Earth is nearly two orders of magnitude more massive than the Moon. Do you really think they should be binary?

Plus their barycenter is located within earth.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests