Celestia Forums

I've just added HD 154857 b, HD 117618 b, HD 102117 b, HD 208487 b, and made a significant revision to the Mu Ara system. The new file has been committed to the CVS tree, so should show up at the follow URL soon:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/extrasolar.ssc

Grant

mu Ara b and c share 2 points of their orbits?
This is quite strange! I saw somewhere that one of them (not the new one close to the star) is an hypotetical planet, not found anyway, so should it be included in celestia?

http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/2M1207.html

new 2M1207/b



je vois l? !!

andyrock wrote:mu Ara b and c share 2 points of their orbits?
This is quite strange!

No more strange than Neptune and Pluto, whose orbits also cross, but they're never in the same place at the same time ... trouble is we don't know the relative inclination of the two orbits. The calculated orbit of c may also change a little, since we haven't seen it go completely around the parent star yet.

andyrock wrote:I saw somewhere that one of them (not the new one close to the star) is an hypotetical planet, not found anyway, so should it be included in celestia? :?:

Nah, this planet c seems to be on a pretty good footing in its new incarnation ... it (or another unconfirmed object!) was previously assigned a more tentative 1300-1500 day orbit, but that didn't work well theoretically, apparently.

Grant

symaski62 wrote:new 2M1207/b

Nous n'avons pas une orbite ... seulement l'angle de la s?peration dans le ciel.
(We don't have an orbit ... only the angular separation in the sky.)

Grant

cel://Follow/2MASS%200415-0935/2004-09-17T18:33:13.59663?x=QK6S7+c1is8eJnw&y=ABp3iZ+kPAPd4m///////w&z=ACgNP45i6XQcGyv//////w&ow=0.933036&ox=0.257796&oy=0.246289&oz=0.048245&select=2MASS%200415-0935&fov=25.421543&ts=1.000000<d=0&rf=73635&lm=49152




cel://Follow/2MASS%200937+2931/2004-09-17T18:35:57.88892?x=AC9E+CmVOEbpwyf//////w&y=gG/6KdYTg7UDjkw&z=SEP3ZimUI9F4Bjb//////w&ow=0.598318&ox=-0.025283&oy=-0.716111&oz=0.358554&select=2MASS%200937+2931&fov=25.421543&ts=1.000000<d=0&rf=73635&lm=49152



cel://Follow/2MASS%201835+3259/2004-09-17T18:38:06.07837?x=gLvG7MO22VvWniQ&y=YICmlGTLGKI/1uk&z=AD4x8J4SVY57Rpk&ow=0.221781&ox=0.285077&oy=0.895498&oz=-0.260051&select=2MASS%201835+3259&fov=25.421543&ts=1.000000<d=0&rf=73635&lm=49152



JE VOIS
(I SEE)

symaski62 wrote:JE VOIS

Mais je ne comprends pas.

Grant

And another update. I've added the provisional transiter OGLE-TR-10 b. Get the updated file off the CVS tree at:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/extrasolar.ssc
OGLE-TR-10 itself has been added to the exoplanetary stars at:
http://www.lns.cornell.edu/~seb/celestia/hutchison/missing-stars.html

Grant

I've added extrasolar planets around stars with the following HD numbers: 99492, 11964 (two planets), 196885, 188015, 183263, 45350, 50499, 89307, 34445, 128311 (second planet).
The updated file is on the CVS tree at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/extrasolar.ssc.

Grant

And the newly described HD 202206 system. The updated file is in the usual place at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/celestia/celestia/data/extrasolar.ssc

Grant

Thanks for the update.

Could the binary nature of PSR 1620-26, and correct rotation periods for the pulsars be specified in extrasolar.stc as well?

( max 25,000ly)
more 25,000ly

Anonymous wrote:Could the binary nature of PSR 1620-26, and correct rotation periods for the pulsars be specified in extrasolar.stc as well?

Many of the extrasolar planets orbit in binary systems, so there's a deal of work to do on extrasolar.stc.
It'll happen.

Grant

granthutchison wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could the binary nature of PSR 1620-26, and correct rotation periods for the pulsars be specified in extrasolar.stc as well?

Many of the extrasolar planets orbit in binary systems, so there's a deal of work to do on extrasolar.stc.
It'll happen.

Grant

PSR 1620-26

I've added extrasolar.stc to the Data folder in Celestia and also put the latest extrasolar.scc there, too.
The binaries aren't!
One example is Tau Boo; Tau Boo A&B are both over 400 LYs from Tau Boo...
Am I doing something wrong or is .stc non-functional?
Alex

Alex,

You need to say exactly which versions you're using.
What you think are the "latest" might not be.

The latest version of extrasolar.ssc is v1.47.
The latest version of extrasolar.stc is v1.2.
They both require Celestia v1.4.0pre6 or later.
They cannot be used with Celestia v1.3.2.

On my system when using these versions, Tau Boo (aka 4 Boo) is a barycenter, not a star. It's about 6.7 AU from Tau Boo A and 26 AU from Tau Boo B.

Does this help at all?

Which version of Celestia are you using?

Guest,

Which "you" do you mean?

I'm using v1.4.0pre6 and/or today's version built from Celestia's CVS archive on SourceForge depending on what I'm testing.

Selden,
I have celestia-win32-1.3.2.exe

Alex,

If you want to see the binary stars properly, then you need to download and install the most recent "prerelease" for v1.4.0.

Be sure to read the Celestia 1.4.0 FAQ
and the announcement of Celestia v1.4.0pre6