|
SpaceEngine Planet Classifications
|
|
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 10:18 | Message # 166 |
 Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Quote (Voekoevaka) When it is habitable, but there is no life, it should be written just "habitable".
But when there is life, there's no need to write "habitable" (because it is already habitable), so you can write "with life".
How world may me habitable, but without life? This have no sence for me. Maybe because Russian word denoting habitability implies some life forms, at least human.
Quote (Watsisname) One change I would make to it is have the lines for Liquid Composition and Coverage combined together, e.g. "Laky Hydrocarbons" for Titan, and "Marine Water" for Earth.
I agree with this too.
|
| |
| |
| apenpaap | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 10:30 | Message # 167 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 1063
Status: Offline
| Well, habitable in English just means it could support life, irrelevant of whether or not there is life. A completely sterile planet with liquid water, about 20% oxygen at 1 bar pressure, no harmful radiation etc. would be habitable, despite the lack of life.
I occasionally stream at http://www.twitch.tv/magistermystax. Sometimes SE, sometimes other games.
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 10:31 | Message # 168 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| I believe it is meant for a planet with surface properties (temperature, pressure, liquid water) that are appropriate for life to develop, but for whatever reason it didn't work out and there is not any life there.
And yeah, one needs to be clear if it is meant as being habitable for humans, or just any form of life in general. The former would be a lot easier to specify.
edit: Whoops, ninja'd by Apenpaap.
|
| |
| |
| midtskogen | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 12:06 | Message # 169 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1674
Status: Offline
| Quote (apenpaap) A completely sterile planet with liquid water, about 20% oxygen at 1 bar pressure, no harmful radiation etc. would be habitable, despite the lack of life.
Unrelated to your point, but are there any known "sterile" processes that could give a 20% oxygen atmosphere?
I also agree that class name mustn't become too long and specific. Then it's better with separate tags. The classification is hard, since the boundaries are not clear anyway. Vague classifications could dodge a number of these problems.
NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
|
| |
| |
| apenpaap | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 12:19 | Message # 170 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 1063
Status: Offline
| Quote (midtskogen) Unrelated to your point, but are there any known "sterile" processes that could give a 20% oxygen atmosphere?
As far as I know there isn't; I was just explaining the term.
I occasionally stream at http://www.twitch.tv/magistermystax. Sometimes SE, sometimes other games.
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 17:34 | Message # 171 |
|
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Quote (midtskogen) Unrelated to your point, but are there any known "sterile" processes that could give a 20% oxygen atmosphere?
Oceanias are assumed to have an atmosphere composed by water vapor, oxygen and helium. Oxygen is formed by decomposition of water to oxegen and hydrogen by solar UV radiation. Hydrogen leaves the planet, oxygen remains. It couldn't be used to oxidation of minerals, because oceania have no minerals on its surface.
|
| |
| |
| smjjames | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 18:13 | Message # 172 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 913
Status: Offline
| http://arcbuilder.home.bresnan.net/PCLMaster.html
Taking a little bit of inspiration from that, how about Pelagic Titan?
|
| |
| |
| Joey_Penguin | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 18:47 | Message # 173 |
 Pioneer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 311
Status: Offline
| It'd be a Teathic world.
Quote (smjjames) Harbs suggestion of carbonia or carbonian would be a good one.
But wouldn't that suggest a carbon or diamond planet?
Careful. The PLATT Collective has spurs.
Edited by Joey_Penguin - Saturday, 08.06.2013, 01:12 |
| |
| |
| smjjames | Date: Friday, 07.06.2013, 19:12 | Message # 174 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 913
Status: Offline
| If it were geologically active, yes, but that listing has far more detail than SE can do right now, ranging from how geologically active it is, composition, geological cycle, etc. Then again, Teathic is the only one that is actually described as a global ocean of methane.
Tartarian could work if it weren't for the fact that the name would describe it as hellish (tartarus, hades) and the description says it would be a life bearing world. There are others with hydrocarbons or methane in the description, but they are situational on one way or another.
Harbs suggestion of carbonia or carbonian would be a good one.
Quote (Joey_Penguin) Quote (smjjames)
Harbs suggestion of carbonia or carbonian would be a good one.
But wouldn't that suggest a carbon or diamond planet?
Good point, although we don't actually have that planet class yet.
Edited by smjjames - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 16:59 |
| |
| |
| BlackArk | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 12:45 | Message # 175 |
|
Space Pilot
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 137
Status: Offline
| http://arcbuilder.home.bresnan.net/PCLMaster.html
All diffent types of class planets,comet and Asteroid bodies types.
|
| |
| |
| Tim | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 14:07 | Message # 176 |
 Explorer
Group: Users
Belgium
Messages: 296
Status: Offline
| That looks very interesting for future releases I believe. 
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 15:01 | Message # 177 |
|
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Quote (BlackArk) http://arcbuilder.home.bresnan.net/PCLMaster.html
All diffent types of class planets,comet and Asteroid bodies types.
This was discussed here a lot of times. This classification have no clear system.
|
| |
| |
| Proteus | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 19:39 | Message # 178 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 173
Status: Offline
| Even with the planet's classes and the default assumptions of chemical make up based on the class label, will there be any wiki information eventually for the planets, etc, elaborating the different chemicals and the such anyway?
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 20:29 | Message # 179 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote (Proteus) eventually
Yes
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
|
| |
| |
| Joey_Penguin | Date: Thursday, 20.06.2013, 20:30 | Message # 180 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 311
Status: Offline
| Quote (SpaceEngineer) This classification have no clear system.
It groups planets, moons, and asteroids based on mass, composition, and geologic activity.
EDIT:
This isn't quite a classification system, but it may help with making things more scientifically accurate.
Careful. The PLATT Collective has spurs.
Edited by Joey_Penguin - Friday, 21.06.2013, 19:19 |
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Russian Federation 
Antarctica 
United States 
Norway 
Belgium