Re: [nbos] Astro3 Experimental Build
"Robert Graham"
Sun Nov 22nd, 2009
Actually a lot of it depends on the mass of the planet, star and the
distance between each.



Most people seem to think Binaries and Trinaries are 'really close' yet the
distances are actually rather large, even the nearest Trinary we know of
Alpha Cent A,B and Prox have a massive distance between them.. and you have
to remember our Limited Astronomy has shown that their may indeed be planets
in orbit of Alpha Cent.



The other thing is how much is Ed actually using real 'calculations' vs
creating an Orbit based on the parameters set in the orbital data... because
honestly it's not like we are asking for as Mike has pointed out an actual
physics simulation but the ability to view our multipul main star systems as
they really would exist.. *shrugs*



The Other big thing I'd look at though, is moving towards drag/drop and the
like.. Being able to just do something light shift click on a star and be
zoomed down into the Orbital 'level' and from their being able to start
building the system.. either through 'autogen' or by hand.. then being able
to zoom back out.. smoothlessly etc and before some one starts screaming at
me that it's 'impossible' the 'graphics code is massive for such a thing' Ed
knows what I've been working on unlike some others here so he knows that I
do understand in part what I'm asking and how it works. The biggest thing
being Ed has Astro using OGL *winces* rather than Direct X.



And sorry I've just woken up but the other thing is i've spent a lot of time
recently looking at orbital mechanics.. and you'd be surprised at how....
robust orbits can end up being.. else we'd all be doing fig 8's not only
around our sun but jupitur, ppl seem to forget as much as we like to believe
gravity is a 'constant' it tends to actually in physics terms be more of a
'gradient' when it comes to orbits.



From: nbossoftware-bounces-at-nbos.com [mailto:nbossoftware-bounces-at-nbos.com]
On Behalf Of Mike Oliver
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2009 3:09 AM
To: nbossoftware-at-nbos.com
Subject: Re: [nbos] Astro3 Experimental Build



I'd love to see an attempt to produce diplays of multiple systems and
wouldn't commit suicide if the result wasn't totally accurate in terms of
the astrophysics. This is mostly being used for RolePlaying, I think, and my
small group don't understand some of the simpler technical stuff I put into
my sessions, so certainly wouldn't shout in ridicule if I produced a
scientifically improbable (impossible?) star system.



The Traveller add-on "Worldbuilder" (and a number of other RPG systems) had
a set of conventions for determining orbital details of Primaries,
Secondaries and Tertiaries and the planetary system associated. I developed
these into software for the Atari ST way back when. I didn't get any
complaints from my customers (true there were only a few-score) about
inaccurate.



Cheers,



Mike

www.warmodelling.co.uk

www.cartography-services.co.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: nbossoftware-bounces-at-nbos.com [mailto:nbossoftware-bounces-at-nbos.com]
On Behalf Of T'Star
Sent: 22 November 2009 14:19
To: nbossoftware-at-nbos.com
Subject: Re: [nbos] Astro3 Experimental Build



The catch is especially when you get up to 3 or more bodies the orbits are
so convoluted and erratic they only theorize the math based on what they've
observed. They don't 'stack' the way planet vs. sun does because the mass
differential is very seldom great enough... And even with 2 you tend to
wind up with interesting figure 8 style orbits for your planets rather than
planets in stable orbit around 2 primaries... (what I remember from /my/
astronomy class. basic though it was.)

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Marcus Andronicus
<shadowdragonne-at-yahoo.com> wrote:


If I understand my limited knowledge of orbital mechanics correctly,
binaries and such generally orbit a point in space, rather than a point
within the primary as star/planet systems tend towards. If you designate the
point in space as the location in the sector, then you should be able to
generate the orbits of the stars themselves based on the distance from one
another and their respective masses, but I am assuming that mass and
distance have been taken into account for Astro2. This would mean being able
to designate stars as "planets" to give them the necessary data fields but
its a start? By setting up each system in this manner this could also lead
to slightly more realistic orbits of all bodies, albeit somewhat more
complicated.

just my two centavii- good work so far tho Ed and crew from what little i
have been able to play with Astro3.

kurtis


--- On Fri, 11/20/09, NBOS Support <support2-at-nbos.com> wrote:


From: NBOS Support <support2-at-nbos.com>


Subject: Re: [nbos] Astro3 Experimental Build

To: nbossoftware-at-nbos.com
Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 10:57 PM




The problem with binaries/trinaries has always been that there's no way to
calculate up front what a stable arrangement would be (that I'm aware of).
I can stick three stars there in the display, but it's unlikely it'd be a
stable orbit. Planets of those stars have the same problem. So I may try
it, but realize that its unlikely they'll be correct/stable arrangements.
It'll just be a static display to show relative distance.

Similar problem with the temperature. Not every system is capable of having
a planet of a certain temperature. The temperature of a planet is derived
from a number of pieces of info, and the process is one way - you cant
reverse engineer it.

For planets, its best to just manually add them in and change their
temperatures. Or perhaps make a script that can place a planet at an
estimated distance. There's a TempAt() method of the Body class that will
let you get the 'equilibrium' temperature at a certain distance from a star.


> Ed, just wondering if there are any plans to finally look at incorporating
Binaries on the Solar Level at all with the eye towards Astro 3.. I mean
it's one of the most requested features outside the data access..
>
> The other thing is, and it's more a general question.. is there any way to
set Astro up so you could specify the 'temprature' you want for a planet and
it generate where / what orbit it requires?
>
> -Rob
> _______________________________________________
> Nbossoftware mailing list
> <http://mc/compose?to=>
>

_______________________________________________
Nbossoftware mailing list
<http://mc/compose?to=>




_______________________________________________
Nbossoftware mailing list






_______________________________________________
Nbossoftware mailing list



Copyright © 2003-2007, NBOS Software. All rights reserved. 'Fractal Mapper', 'ScreenMonkey', 'Character Sketcher', 'Inspiration Pad', 'Fractal World Explorer', 'Goblin API', 'AstroSynthesis' are trademarks of NBOS Software. 'Dwarven Beserker' art by V. Shane.
Member contributed resources