|
General suggestions
|
|
| DeathStar | Date: Saturday, 30.08.2014, 19:12 | Message # 346 |
|
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
| Read.the.faq.
|
| |
| |
| werdnaforever | Date: Saturday, 30.08.2014, 21:37 | Message # 347 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 897
Status: Offline
| Quote Splendy (  ) Imagine if this amazing game was for mac. cool You should try to make it suitable for mac by making the folder a .jar folder! smile
Please do this because I run a mac. victory
Quote DeathStar ( ) Read.the.faq.
Quote werdnaforever ( ) Since most new users seem to head straight for the forum to make their suggestions without reading the FAQ, the best way to avoid redundant threads and suggestions would be to have a giant link to the FAQ at the index page of the forum. It should be the first thing there, before any of the categories.
Quote DoctorOfSpace ( ) Especially if it has words like WARNING or BAN emphasized somewhere in there.
(...or shorter version of rules on rules page as Harb suggested)
Maybe actual text would be better though, since non-native (or non-English) speakers can actually translate it to their own language.
Edited by werdnaforever - Saturday, 30.08.2014, 22:38 |
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Saturday, 30.08.2014, 23:03 | Message # 348 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote werdnaforever ( ) ...or shorter version of rules on rules page as Harb suggested
http://en.spaceengine.org/forum/0-0-0-36
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
|
| |
| |
| werdnaforever | Date: Saturday, 30.08.2014, 23:37 | Message # 349 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 897
Status: Offline
| Quote HarbingerDawn ( ) http://en.spaceengine.org/forum/0-0-0-36
Looks great! I think the last two sentences should be in yellow due to their importance.
|
| |
| |
| bagra4u | Date: Monday, 01.09.2014, 14:10 | Message # 350 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 3
Status: Offline
| Hi.
As you can see I'm new here.
SpaceEngine is fabulous program and I'm blessed to cross my (virtual) path with it. 
I got one question though, and if it's silly... just tell me.
Gently. 
Can we have, beside all the others data - and escape velocity speed for (selected) space body ?
Maybe you'll feel that that's not important but since I often fly near surface, I got myself very often thinkg "oh, with this speed, would I reach the orbit, would I escape, or would I just hit the ground?" I think, imho, it would be cool to match that speed when flying low. There would be many surprises, since many bodies have big diameter but low mass etc...
It must be mentioned that I "fly" with just camera panning around and not with real ships, I'm not sure would they... solve this... problem by themselves, I mean their mass, energy vs gravity thing, you know, but I really love to just "fly" on my own way. Ships, in a way, blocking my view you know.
Thanks for reading everyone.
Edited by bagra4u - Monday, 01.09.2014, 15:07 |
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Monday, 01.09.2014, 17:04 | Message # 351 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| That information is already there: open the "wiki" information screen, using the left control panel or the [I] key. Go to the "Physical" screen. At the bottom, 1st cosmic velocity is orbital speed at the surface, and 2nd cosmic velocity is escape velocity at the surface.
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
|
| |
| |
| bagra4u | Date: Monday, 01.09.2014, 19:58 | Message # 352 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Pirate
Messages: 3
Status: Offline
| Oh it's already there. 
I should have know. Just that it wasn't too... shinny and I was too lazy to dig deeper so....
Thank you HD. I'm looking forward for some newly found entertainment in SE.
Edited by bagra4u - Monday, 01.09.2014, 20:00 |
| |
| |
| Salvo | Date: Wednesday, 03.09.2014, 08:24 | Message # 353 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
| What about adding a black atmosphere to black holes to make them more smooth? rolleyes
Just a random idea came to my mind a while ago.
The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.
CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs
(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Wednesday, 03.09.2014, 19:43 | Message # 354 |
 Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| Why them must be smooth? This have no physical sense.
|
| |
| |
| Vetein | Date: Thursday, 04.09.2014, 00:16 | Message # 355 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
Brazil
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
| I have a suggestion, a simple one.
You know, for example when you are in the bottom of the ocean and its very dark, so it would be good if we could have, like a "lantern" of something like this to iluminate.
Its very boring going to the Settings all the time and put more shining.
Thats my idea, its simple and a little stupid but it would be cool. 
|
| |
| |
| FastFourierTransform | Date: Thursday, 04.09.2014, 01:30 | Message # 356 |
 Pioneer
Group: Local Moderators
Spain
Messages: 542
Status: Offline
| Quote SpaceEngineer ( ) Why them must be smooth? This have no physical sense.
When I saw Salvo's message I thinked the same but with a bit of mental juggling I'm starting to consider the idea quite logical.
Space Engine accounts for geometrical distortion of light near the black hole but doesn't account for the wavelength distortions of light. Near the black hole, the light losses more energy. To arrive to our eyes it has been redshifted. In fact the engine should consider this changes in the frequency of light sooner or later. I suppose that the issue is a lot more complicated that what I'm going to say but maybe what Salvo said has somo truth in it.
From our point of view, the light sources that are near (near angularly) from the boundary of the black hole have to be more redshifted that the other sources. If we get the light source closer to the boundary the redshift is so high that light from stars enters the infrarred and then microwaves and so on. That passage from deep red to infrared must be like a gradient that makes light intensity vanish like if there where a black athmosphere around the black hole. I don't know what are the proportions, or if this is totally negligible and we can see only a sharp black edge for the black hole but is interesting to learn about this because maybe all the usual pictures of black holes are a bit non-rigorous.
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Thursday, 04.09.2014, 04:04 | Message # 357 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| I was under the impression he meant to make the solid black circle part of the black hole (what people generally think of as being the event horizon, but it actually isn't) a more smooth in appearance. It should be a perfect circle, but graphics make it seem pixelated or aliased. Perhaps introducing a black atmosphere effect could improve the appearance.
At least that's what I think he's suggesting anyway. And I'm not sure how a black atmosphere could be used to simulate gravitational redshift. Light climbing out of the gravity well is redshifted, but light falling into it is blue shifted, as seen from perspective of a stationary observer. For an observer looking at a background object behind the hole, there is no shift at all because the two effects cancel each other.
|
| |
| |
| DoctorOfSpace | Date: Friday, 05.09.2014, 23:55 | Message # 358 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
| Quote Watsisname ( ) Perhaps introducing a black atmosphere effect could improve the appearance.
Or just wait for proper anti-aliasing to be implemented.
Quote Watsisname ( ) And I'm not sure how a black atmosphere could be used to simulate gravitational redshift.
It couldn't be. The most you could do is adjust the atmosphere so you see a red color along the horizon and blue above. In principle this sounds like a good idea, but in practice its a terrible idea.
Here is a black hole surface with a custom atmosphere stuck on top
If I use a black atmosphere then you can't see anything. There is no distortion effect due to a shader edit.
Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Saturday, 06.09.2014, 22:19 | Message # 359 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| What I meant to say is I don't know how any kind of atmosphere could properly simulate gravitational redshift. It's just not the right approach even in theory. An atmosphere causes a glow effect by scattering of rays. This doesn't happen around black holes -- it's a vacuum. The color/intensity will also always be wrong because it depends only on mass of atmosphere through which the rays travels, and not the direction. For gravitational red/blue shift, it depends on difference in field strength between source and observer. These simply do not correlate.
|
| |
| |
| SpaceEngineer | Date: Saturday, 06.09.2014, 23:35 | Message # 360 |
|
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
| On the screenshots here you can see the "black atmosphere" effect. It is simply modification of the shader (I also removed black sphere because shader now can generate the black round without pixelization effect). I will replace it with the redshift/blueshift effect though.
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Croatia 
Pirate 
United States 
Italy 
Russian Federation 
Brazil 
Spain 