|
Further away objects are younger
|
|
| Ingolifs | Date: Monday, 17.03.2014, 12:28 | Message # 1 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| Currently, the universe is contained in a 10 GPc box and looks pretty homogeneous.
I think it would be pretty interesting if as you moved further out from the Milky Way to the edge of the universe, galaxies and other astronomical objects appeared younger. In order:
-Decrease in the quantity of high-metallicity Population I stars and planets
-Decrease in stellar remnants such as White Dwarfs, black holes, etc.
-Decrease in the size of galaxies and the number of giant ellipticals
-Appearance of active galactic nuclei, Quasars and such.
-Hypothetical primordial objects such as Quasi-stars and Population III stars.
-CMB radiation
I have read somewhere that Spaceengineer plans to make the universe much bigger, isotropic and repeating (so that you end up in the same place after travelling in a straight line for a long time). I think this makes Spaceengine less interesting at large scales and provides no special incentive to explore around the farthest reaches of the universe.
|
| |
| |
| apenpaap | Date: Monday, 17.03.2014, 13:27 | Message # 2 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 1063
Status: Offline
| That only works when you look at it from a great distance like in real life, though. Since you almost always look at objects from reasonably close by in SE, I don't think it would be such a good idea. On the other hand, it would be pretty interesting to see.
I occasionally stream at http://www.twitch.tv/magistermystax. Sometimes SE, sometimes other games.
|
| |
| |
| Ingolifs | Date: Monday, 17.03.2014, 13:40 | Message # 3 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| Quote Since you almost always look at objects from reasonably close by in SE, I don't think it would be such a good idea.
Sorry, I don't mean that objects reflect their age depending on how far the viewer is from them. I mean that objects that are a great distance from the milky way are generated to resemble those in a much younger universe.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Monday, 17.03.2014, 15:11 | Message # 4 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Ingolifs (  ) I mean that objects that are a great distance from the milky way are generated to resemble those in a much younger universe.
But that would be inaccurate. The universe is the same age everywhere.
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
|
| |
| |
| midtskogen | Date: Monday, 17.03.2014, 20:52 | Message # 5 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1674
Status: Offline
| Quote Ingolifs ( ) I think this makes Spaceengine less interesting at large scales and provides no special incentive to explore around the farthest reaches of the universe.
What are the farthest reaches of the universe? Will you recognise that you are at a farthest reach of the universe when you stand there? That you somehow are close to the "edge"?
What you ask for is a way to travel back in time and simulate that accurately, and that the distance from Earth dictates how far back in time you go. To fix time with distance from Earth will make Earth a kind of centre of the universe, which will be an incorrect simulation of the universe. So such time travel has to be independent of location. The young universe isn't something that only existed far away from Earth.
NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
|
| |
| |
| Ingolifs | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 03:13 | Message # 6 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| Quote But that would be inaccurate. The universe is the same age everywhere.
Quote which will be an incorrect simulation of the universe.
All simulations of the universe are by necessity inaccurate. The current setup of spaceengine is inaccurate.
It's a matter of which inaccuracy you choose to make the game more interesting.
Let me elaborate:
You have two basic types of object in spaceengine, Catalogue and procedural. The procedural objects have no history and are thereby depicted in an arbitrary slice of time. The catalogue objects have positions and properties based on how we see them currently, not how they are 'now' in any meaningful sense of the word. The further away an object is from us, the more outdated our information on it is. This is already the case for catalogue objects in spaceengine.
My suggestion is merely that this appear to be the case for procedural objects as well.
I'm not making any sort of suggestion of time travel or of dynamically simulating the history of an object as you approach it at superluminal velocities. I'm aware of how hard (read, impossible) that would be to code. My suggestion is that spaceengine represent a snapshot of the universe as we currently see it, with procedural content filling in the gaps in an internally consistent manner. What we currently have is a simulation where only the catalogue content is a snapshot of the universe as we currently see it and the procedural content is a representation of what we think the universe is like 'now', which is not self-consistent.
Unless one is willing to model the relativistic effects of the camera zipping around at superluminal speed and model the evolution of the universe (more or less impossible to implement), there will be inevitably be internal inconsistencies with any universe simulator. The question is simply, which inconsistencies are we more prepared to accept, and which make for a more interesting experience?
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 04:13 | Message # 7 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Ingolifs ( ) The current setup of spaceengine is inaccurate.
But you suggest trying to intentionally make it inaccurate, rather than it being inaccurate due to incompleteness or limitations.
Confining everything in SE's universe to the limitations of Earth-based observation is not what SE exists for, and would show the universe only as we see it and not as it really is. Catalog objects appearing thousands or millions of years out of date is a matter of necessity, and it helps people learn astronomy in the context of modern observations. But the entire universe shouldn't have to conform to that just for the sake of consistency, especially considering it doesn't even feel inconsistent now.
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
|
| |
| |
| Ingolifs | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 05:47 | Message # 8 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| Quote Confining everything in SE's universe to the limitations of Earth-based observation is not what SE exists for
That's not what I suggested.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 08:58 | Message # 9 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Ingolifs ( ) That's not what I suggested.
You suggested is making everything in SE be generated to match the universe as seen from Earth at the present time. Here are your exact words:
Quote Ingolifs ( ) The further away an object is from us, the more outdated our information on it is. This is already the case for catalogue objects in spaceengine.
My suggestion is merely that this appear to be the case for procedural objects as well.
Quote Ingolifs ( ) My suggestion is that spaceengine represent a snapshot of the universe as we currently see it, with procedural content filling in the gaps in an internally consistent manner.
That's what I was saying.
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
|
| |
| |
| Ingolifs | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 13:43 | Message # 10 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| Quote HarbingerDawn ( ) Quote Ingolifs ()
That's not what I suggested.
You suggested is making everything in SE be generated to match the universe as seen from Earth at the present time.
My bad. I thought you thought my suggestion was about tying the viewpoint to earth so that there was no travel at all.
In any case, did Spaceengineer not say that he wanted to eventually include every space phenomenon known? And would that not include things like quasars, active galactic nuclei and other things that used to exist in our neck of the woods but only exists now far away? I for one would really like to explore such objects. Wouldn't you?
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Tuesday, 18.03.2014, 14:18 | Message # 11 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Ingolifs ( ) And would that not include things like quasars, active galactic nuclei and other things that used to exist in our neck of the woods but only exists now far away?
Active galactic nuclei still exist in the local universe, so it would be quite possible to visit them in a universe 13.8 billion years old.
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
|
| |
| |
| Ingolifs | Date: Wednesday, 19.03.2014, 09:30 | Message # 12 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
New Zealand
Messages: 30
Status: Offline
| The youngest quasar we know of is 2.4 billion years old and most are far older.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Wednesday, 19.03.2014, 10:21 | Message # 13 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| But AGN still exist in the local universe, and it's not impossible for a quasar to exist today. Even if they were just as probable at all ages of the universe, you would still expect to find increasing numbers of them with increasing distance simply because of the rapidly increasing sample size at larger distances. So representing a modern universe does not at all preclude the inclusion of quasars.
Also, the nearest quasar known to have existed in the modern universe is only 730 million light-years away, which ceased its quasar activity only within the last 70,000 years, further proving that quasars can and do exist in the modern universe. The nearest active quasar is 2.4 billion light years away, which means we see it when the universe was 82% of its current age - pretty recent by cosmic standards.
So if we see 2 more-or-less modern quasars within a 1.7624e+6 cubic Mpc volume (not including other recently inactive ones yet to be discovered or undiscoverable), then we should expect to see up to one million or more quasars within a 1e+12 cubic Mpc volume - the size of the current SE universe.
Anyway, quasars are simply the most dramatic examples of AGNs, which are ubiquitous throughout the cosmos. They will be quite plentiful even in an SE with a modern universe.
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
Edited by HarbingerDawn - Wednesday, 19.03.2014, 10:32 |
| |
| |
| wtg62 | Date: Saturday, 22.03.2014, 23:55 | Message # 14 |
|
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 8
Status: Offline
| Really can't wait to see Quasars in game... I bet they'd look awesome.
I think light actually taking time to reach the users viewpoint would be an awesome (and realistic) feature to add to SE, making an object appear younger than it actually is depending on the distance you are at from it (For example, being 1 AU away from an object makes it appear ~8 minutes younger than it actually is, and being 1 ly away from it makes it appear a year younger).
Although I don't see it being very easy to code, since that means having to figure out some way to allow the player to zoom towards an object and see it's state getting closer and closer to it's actual present form (without ludicrous latency).
Still though, it'd be awesome, right?
Edited by wtg62 - Saturday, 22.03.2014, 23:56 |
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Sunday, 23.03.2014, 01:43 | Message # 15 |
|
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote wtg62 ( ) Still though, it'd be awesome, right?
Yeah it would. But I think that's beyond what will be possible for this program.
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
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
New Zealand 
Antarctica 
United States 
Norway 