Celestia Forums

One day maybe i create an add on which fills up Milky Way

Spaceman wrote:Of course it's a personal project, but i don't know if i could upload it into the Celestia Motherlode .

Hungry4info wrote:So with your add-on, how many stars do you intend to make? Are you going to make millions? Thousands?

Hungry4info wrote:If you don't make a large amount, when one is far from the galaxy they'll notice. Big blob of stars in one part of the galaxy, a sprinkle of stars for the rest of it. Et cetera.

Reiko wrote:To populate your galaxy with the cluster generator I found it is best to make about three clusters of about 100,000 stars each and place their centers about 200 ly from each other.
It makes a nice dense star field like in our region of the galaxy.
Set the planet generator to about 30% and you will have plenty of worlds to explore in your new galaxy.

Hungry4info wrote:I certainly wish you the best of luck! I would be interested in downloading this upon it's completion.

Spaceman wrote:Images are coming soon.

Astrobiology Magazene wrote:Since the discovery in 1995 of a planet around the star 51 Pegasi by Mayor and Didier Queloz, more than 270 exoplanets have been found, mostly around solar-like stars. Most of these planets are giants, such as Jupiter or Saturn, and current statistics show that about 1 out of 14 stars harbors this kind of planet.

The Tech Herald wrote:Using the HARPS (High Accuracy Radial Velocity Planet Searcher) spectrograph at La Scilla Observatory in Chile, the team were able to estimate that around one third of stars in the galaxy were orbited by planets.

A paper wrote:The radial velocities of ~1800 nearby Sun-like stars are currently being monitored by eight high-sensitivity Doppler exoplanet surveys. Approximately 90 of these stars have been found to host exoplanets massive enough to be detectable. Thus at least ~5% of target stars possess planets. If we limit our analysis to target stars that have been monitored the longest (~15 years), ~11% possess planets. If we limit our analysis to stars monitored the longest and whose low surface activity allow the most precise velocity measurements, ~25% possess planets. By identifying trends of the exoplanet mass and period distributions in a sub-sample of exoplanets less-biased by selection effects, and linearly extrapolating these trends into regions of parameter space that have not yet been completely sampled, we find at least ~9% of Sun-like stars have planets in the mass and orbital period ranges Msin(i) > 0.3 M_Jupiter and P < 13 years, and at least ~22% have planets in the larger range Msin(i) > 0.1 M_Jupiter and P < 60 years. Even this larger area of the mass-period plane is less than 20% of the area occupied by our planetary system, suggesting that this estimate is still a lower limit to the true fraction of Sun-like stars with planets, which may be as large as ~100%.

Spaceman wrote:I make an experiment and i want your options.

BobHegwood wrote:You want options? Or opinions?

BobHegwood wrote:If the second, you would do well to show the exact same area of space for a comparison so that opinions
could be based on the same data displayed in different ways.

Spaceman wrote:Any star with planets orbiting around it (only) will also have some comets . Stars with companion stars and substellar objects, well... will not have comets

Spaceman wrote:Because how realistic is a comet orbiting around a central star, having and other stars orbiting around the central star? For me, it's unrealistic. A comet will change it's orbit continuously, because of the gravity from the other stars. Also it's a matter of balance. A star with companion stars and planets it's more interesting than a lonely star with only planets around it. So let's make the lonely stars more interesting with some extra comets:wink:

BobHegwood wrote:Their orbits might be a bit more chaotic...