Celestia Forums

Allright, let's try to expain this. I love the mix of science and fiction in Celestia, but I'd like to have the possibility to separate the two. In another thread I suggested a new feature that would label fact as fact and fiction as fiction (and this could be extended to allow the coexistence of different fictional universes around the same star (stars like Alpha Centauri or Epsilon Eridani are portrayed in a very significant number of ways in Science Fiction)). But since this feature, if the developers decide to implement it, would mean some work and therefore time, I went thinking about possible workarounds.

One of these workarounds would be the creation of entirely fictional galaxies or "globular cluster-like" agglomerates of fictional stars with their fictional planets, leaving the actual galaxy for the actual solar and extrasolar planets and other objects. So, instead of inventing a solar system around the existing star HIP 1197 (as I've done to test some textures), we could simply invent a star in that invented cluster and place the planets and everything else there. Would this be possible? If so, how?

Thanks

Jorge wrote:Allright, let's try to expain this. I love the mix of science and fiction in Celestia, but I'd like to have the possibility to separate the two. In another thread I suggested a new feature that would label fact as fact and fiction as fiction (and this could be extended to allow the coexistence of different fictional universes around the same star (stars like Alpha Centauri or Epsilon Eridani are portrayed in a very significant number of ways in Science Fiction)). But since this feature, if the developers decide to implement it, would mean some work and therefore time, I went thinking about possible workarounds.

One of these workarounds would be the creation of entirely fictional galaxies or "globular cluster-like" agglomerates of fictional stars with their fictional planets, leaving the actual galaxy for the actual solar and extrasolar planets and other objects. So, instead of inventing a solar system around the existing star HIP 1197 (as I've done to test some textures), we could simply invent a star in that invented cluster and place the planets and everything else there. Would this be possible? If so, how?

Thanks

Jorge,

in accordance with Celestia's design philosophy, up to now, the core code of Celestia did never include purely fictional features. As far as I am concerned, this will not change. Fictional features are rather a matter for add-on creators.

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:in accordance with Celestia's design philosophy, up to now, the core code of Celestia did never include purely fictional features. As far as I am concerned, this will not change. Fictional features are rather a matter for add-on creators.

Well, this isn't entirely true. You do have fictional features in the core code of Celestia in the code that allows for fictional textures being "superimposed" over the limit of knowledge textures. My proposed "fictitious" tag (or category) is simply an extension of that phylosophy, allowing to strip the reality from fiction simply by (un)checking a checkbox. As happens currently with planets and asteroids whose surface characteristics are unknown and get some fictional texture over what would otherwise be a blank, you could then browse planetary systems as we know them or as we may imagine them. It's the same thing, only in a different scale.

What I ask in this thread is simply a workaround in case this feature does not get implemented anytime soon. If it does, then there'd be no need for this galaxy/cluster thing. If it doesn't, then I'd like to be able to "kick" all the fiction into a fictional cluster, leaving the local neighborhood "clean" with its real population of planets, asteroids, stars, etc. I'd only keep the fictional textures.

In any case, even this isn't purely fictional. Someone may want to add to Celestia a real-world globular cluster much the same way in which some folks are doing stunning planetary nebulas. At the very least, when they run out of planetary nebulas - there aren't all that many around. And so I ask: can it be done? If so, how?

Jorge wrote:

t00fri wrote:in accordance with Celestia's design philosophy, up to now, the core code of Celestia did never include purely fictional features.
...

Well, this isn't entirely true.

Before being inadequately corrected, I'd appreciate if you read my post carefully: I said purely fictitional. That IS TRUE.

You do have fictional features in the core code of Celestia in the code that allows for fictional textures being "superimposed" over the limit of knowledge textures.

Celestia has a very modularized multi-purpose design. That's what makes it such a great program. The point is that you may overlay ANYTHING you like, which may or may NOT be connected to fictional stuff. But we would never implement something that would /exclusively/ have fictitional applications.

In any case, even this isn't purely fictional. Someone may want to add to Celestia a real-world globular cluster much the same way in which some folks are doing stunning planetary nebulas. At the very least, when they run out of planetary nebulas - there aren't all that many around. And so I ask: can it be done? If so, how?

We are presently implementing thousands of globular clusters in a fully automatized way, in analogy to our recent FT1 implementation of 10000+ galaxies into Celelstia. I suggest you frequent some /professional/ catalogs to appreciate how many globulars and planetary nebulae are meanwhile known...

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:

Jorge wrote:

t00fri wrote:in accordance with Celestia's design philosophy, up to now, the core code of Celestia did never include purely fictional features.
...

Well, this isn't entirely true.

Before being inadequately corrected, I'd appreciate if you read my post carefully: I said purely fictitional. That IS TRUE.

It is? OK, I'll accept that. But it means that my suggestion is also not purely fictional, since it's nothing but an extension of the phylosophy behind lok textures, and therefore the reply about not having "purely" fictional features in Celestia was out of place here.

If YOU accept THAT, then we can shake hands and go about our respective businesses.

t00fri wrote:I suggest you frequent some /professional/ catalogs to appreciate how many globulars and planetary nebulae are meanwhile known...

Cut the arrogance and get down the friggin' pedestal, fridge. You haven't got the slightest idea of what I know and what I don't apart of what I've told you so far (which wasn't much) and I don't appreciate being treated as some kind of retard. "There aren't all that many around" in the universal scale means that there are relatively few. RELATIVELY. There could be thousands and they'll still be relatively few. The universe is VAST, in caase you haven't noticed. If you appreciate being read properly, so do I.

Surely you'll agree that are far less known planetary nebulae than globular and open clusters (probably simply because they are harder to detect, especially as they get older and dissipate into the interstellar medium), not to mention stars, don't you?

Jorge wrote:One of these workarounds would be the creation of entirely fictional galaxies or "globular cluster-like" agglomerates of fictional stars with their fictional planets, leaving the actual galaxy for the actual solar and extrasolar planets and other objects. So, instead of inventing a solar system around the existing star HIP 1197 (as I've done to test some textures), we could simply invent a star in that invented cluster and place the planets and everything else there. Would this be possible? If so, how?

My understanding is that globular clusters are not currently supported in Celestia, but can be simulated with very small spherical galaxies. Open clusters can be defined but are only labelled, not rendered. Also, stars cannot be defined in distant deep sky objects due to a limitation on stellar distances. So I think what you're suggesting probably isn't possible.

- Hank

hey!why don't you just rename the files and write (FICTIONAL) beside it?

easy,don't you think?