|
COMMUNITY ADDON - Catalog Fixes for SE
|
|
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Wednesday, 27.07.2016, 07:36 | Message # 46 |
 Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Quote 9876543210 (  ) Here, several stars have problems: 1. S. Dor, current lum; 268 000, actual lum; 910 000 - 2. ETA Car, current lum; 14 249, actual lum; 5 000 000 - 3. Rigel, current lum; 51 711, actual lum; 120 000 - 4. Betelgeuze, current lum; 9 446, actual lum; 90 000... and many many many many more (almost all) luminous stars are much dimmer than reality. Why, i ask??
This has been answered multiple times. Change luminosity of that stars to real values and look on the sky from Solar System. Come constellations got distorted, right? This is because SE don't model interstellar light absorption. These luminous supergiants are really far away, so light absorption reduces their visual brightness a lot. But because SE can't model it, I forced to use visual magnitude in the catalog, thus computed luminosity is smaller than real.
|
| |
| |
| quarior14 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 12:52 | Message # 47 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
| I made the star KIC 8462852, here the file KIC 8462852.sc, put on addons/stars folder.
Code Star "KIC 8462852"
{
RA 20 06 15.457
Dec 44 27 24.61
Dist 454 //pc
MassSol 1.43 //Sun
RadSol 1.58 //Sun
Temperature 6750 //+ or - 120 K
Luminosity 5 //Sun
RotationPeriod 21.1128 //hours
Class "F3 V" //or F3 IV
}
Quarior
Edited by quarior14 - Thursday, 28.07.2016, 12:54 |
| |
| |
| JackDole | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 12:59 | Message # 48 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
| Quote JackDole ( ) The KIC 8462852 system; what we would find there if we could travel there:
Don't forget to look here.
|
| |
| |
| quarior14 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 14:09 | Message # 49 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
| JackDole : Oh sorry, I had not seen, yet I made a search but no result, bizarre (or weird). But yet it is a single star ? No binary from what you put in your mod.
Luminosity 0.67 ? I see 5 in Wikipedia.
Quarior
Edited by quarior14 - Thursday, 28.07.2016, 14:18 |
| |
| |
| JackDole | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 14:18 | Message # 50 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
| There is a red star nearby, possibly a companion. But of course, my system is a little fictional! 
Don't forget to look here.
|
| |
| |
| quarior14 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 14:20 | Message # 51 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
| JackDole, ah OK but I took the data for the exact moment since I added the planets around this star could explain this strange phenomenon but I said no more and I'm not about to publish because these planets come an idea to another person.
Quarior
|
| |
| |
| JackDole | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 15:02 | Message # 52 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
| quarior14,
I do not mind if you publish it.
I just thought that you might be interested, what I have done with it.
And you're right. When searching for 'KIC 8462852', nothing is found here in the forum, although it was often talked about this star here.
But if you searched in Google for 'SpaceEngine KIC 8462852', you might find something.
Don't forget to look here.
|
| |
| |
| steeljaw354 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 15:22 | Message # 53 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
| Will 21 lutetia and steins have it's real texture/surface/look in the next update?
|
| |
| |
| FastFourierTransform | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 16:53 | Message # 54 |
 Pioneer
Group: Local Moderators
Spain
Messages: 542
Status: Offline
| Quote steeljaw354 ( ) Will 21 lutetia and steins have it's real texture/surface/look in the next update?
This is not related to catalog fixes but to addon of textures. By the way. I think probably not. It's a lot of work and now there are more important things in the developement.
We don't have a full coverage of the surface of either Lutetia or Steins, just half of the surface have been mapped. So you would have to artistically depict the other half. The 3D model would be innacurate because we don't have topographic knowledge (besides the siluette of both asteroids). The images we obtained of both asteroids where with very specific lightning conditions so we would also have to "invent" the shadowy parts and we would never get something with a realistic appearence for all conditions and angles (if we want to use the photographies to make the texture). And lastly but very important: the images of Steins are very very low res to make a texture.
|
| |
| |
| quarior14 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 17:00 | Message # 55 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 649
Status: Offline
| Quote JackDole ( ) I do not mind if you publish it.
Yes but must first have a clear concept, will have to wait a long time but I think I have the star is already good.
Quarior
|
| |
| |
| steeljaw354 | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 17:24 | Message # 56 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
| I also realize that 21 Lutetia doesn't appear in the game for some reason
|
| |
| |
| JackDole | Date: Thursday, 28.07.2016, 17:46 | Message # 57 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
| Quote steeljaw354 ( ) I also realize that 21 Lutetia doesn't appear in the game for some reason
But '(21) Lutetia' is in the game, just as 'Lutetia'.
Don't forget to look here.
|
| |
| |
| Golol | Date: Saturday, 20.08.2016, 19:45 | Message # 58 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 1
Status: Offline
| NGC 3603 is the "Most Dense Star Cluster in Milky Way Located" going by what a flashy articly says.
Those obviously aren't necessarily correct but even on wikipedia it says: "The central star cluster is the densest concentration of very massive stars known in the galaxy.
However when I visited this Cluster in SE (newest version at time of the post" it only contained a couple of stars.
Maybe I misunderstood something or I am looking at the wrong object, but there might also be a calatog error.
Nothing too important though.
EDIT:
I did some investigation and noticed that NGC 3603-A1 is 26 ly away from NGC 3603 instead of... well, inside it.
Also NGC 3576 which I think (not really sure) is close to NGC 3603 is sispiciously missing right between 3576 and 3577... What is being hidden from us? Maybe the procedural alrogithm contains secrets which we aren't yet ready for... 
Edited by Golol - Saturday, 20.08.2016, 19:55 |
| |
| |
| arbelrocks | Date: Sunday, 30.10.2016, 02:05 | Message # 59 |
 Space Tourist
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 24
Status: Offline
| In SE:
- Luminous Red Supergiant (M1)
- 150 solar masses
- 3550.05 K
- 0.5 solar luminosity
- 495.65 solar diameter
- 841,571.688 years old
http://imgur.com/a/R0t1I
According to Wikipedia: (for lack of a better source)
- Blue hypergiant (variable)
- 27.5 solar masses
- 11800 K
- 1,600,000 solar luminosity
- 612 solar diameter
- ~4,000,000 years old
Clearly there is a major difference between wikipedia and space engine. Hopefully this is sorted out in the next update.
Also, the Pistol Nebula is missing.
|
| |
| |
| JackDole | Date: Sunday, 30.10.2016, 18:39 | Message # 60 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1742
Status: Offline
| There is a thread where comments and scripts can be posted for incorrect star data: COMMUNITY ADDON - Catalog Fixes for SE
There is no reason to create a separate thread for each incorrect star.
Don't forget to look here.
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Russian Federation 
Pirate 
Germany 
Spain 
