Celestia Forums

...I think that splitting Nebulae from Galaxies has been mentioned before, but nothing's come of it yet. Incorrect...or uninformed (no adrenaline involved here ;-) ) No, I was quite correct. By "nothing's come of it yet" I meant that it hadn't shown up in any official prereleases of Celestia. When ...

Here are some more useful comments than Fridger's, who always gets hot under the collar the moment anyone even mentions thinking that Celestia is any kind of 'game'... To do that, how about a marker of direction, so you know where is the target. For example, you fly near Earth, you type ENTER and MO...

The key of course is how much radiation is B generating. Just because it is 5 times Jupiter?€™s mass doesn't mean it is putting out five times the radiation. Because of its make-up it may actually put out less radiation than Jupiter. Being that it is believed that B has a great deal more water in i...

I'm skeptical of the idea that it's a rocky planet. I mean, it's about 7 earth masses, orbits about 0.02 AU from its primary for a blackbody temperature of about 385K (albedo and greenhouse affect would modify this). And of course it'd be tidelocked. If it was rocky like Earth and had earth's densit...

I sure hope it gets presidential approval. I'd hate to have to hate bush even more, you know.... ;) :D It doesn't already? I thought it had got beyond the planning stages and was being built... If not... well, it's likely screwed. With Bush's damnable insane and badly planned push for manned missio...

Extending science fiction beyond what we take to be a standard of science....it could be possible for a planet such as mesklin depending on its material composition. Relying on known physics however...no it probably would tear itself apart...but then our knowledge is limited to a small portion of t...

You mean the Pluto/Kuiper mission?

http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/

Oh yeah. Definitely looking forward to that.

Mesklin is very much a scifi world (it's from a Hal Clement book called "A Mission of Gravity" I think). Can't exist in reality, it'd fly apart spinning so fast!

Mwahahahaaaaa!!!!

I can even do the "The Fools! They didn't listen to me! But now I've showed them!!!" tirade

Damn. That is a ridiculously cunning way to get the hazy disk effect there. Great stuff!!

Sure ;-) . That's why I called it Hexa world: six sides make a cube ...Never heard of it? ;-) "Cube" sounded much too profane for this 6-sided piece of art... Bye Fridger OK, we're on different wavelengths as usual :). I thought you were calling it a hexagon because it looked like one if you follow...

t00fri wrote:But your "Hexa-world" is cute, indeed.

Erm, don't you recognise a cube when you see one?

What, you're actually managing to use Celestia in a dome? Like a planetarium? I thought you needed one of those Zeiss Projector things for that...

(and er, waves up-island at Terry )

TourqeGlare wrote:This is interesting!

Is it true that the slower a rotating planet goes, the lower the gravity is?

No. The less massive a planet is, the lower its gravity is. You'd have to be rotating ridiculously fast to get a pseudo-gravitational force pulling you to the ground because of the rotation alone.

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/news_room/p ... 31_05.html



I like it when spacecraft take pictures like this

... And Does a software making it possible to calculate the laws of kepler for a moon around a gas giant exist ? Celestia does it perfectly! Put your gas giant and its moon in orbit, by specifying the orbit data in an *.ssc file. Then Celestia does the rest, including a great display! Bye Fridger I...

Wow, those rings would really piss off astronomers on Earth, wouldn't they! :) The light they'd reflect would be quite bright (though it'd be unlikely that they'd be made of Ice like Saturn's. Still, even if they were low albedo like Uranus' rings, they'd still look quite bright from Earth wouldn't ...

Question about Planet magnitudes: referring to http://www.answers.com/topic/absolute-magnitude In this case, the absolute magnitude is defined as the apparent magnitude that the object would have if it were one astronomical unit (au) from both the Sun and the Earth and at a phase angle of zero degre...

Thanks everyone, I've now got about 5 or 6 different equations that all mean the same thing and give the same results :). I've also found that m = 6 is about the limit that can be detected by the naked eye on a good night, m = -4 is about the minimum you need to cast shadows with... Does anyone have...

Hm. Maybe I put a number in wrong then... that's interesting though, because you don't have any (star) terms in there at all other than the luminosity. You could simplify it even further by replacing (d_sol/32.616) with a number (4.858e-7), and (m_sol) with a number too (-26.74). But yes, that defin...