Vision's Addons

[SevenSpheres]

The multiverse is literally "everything we could never see". It is above and beyond the natural, hence it should be described as "supernatural". Believing that the multiverse exists is equivalent to believing God created the universe in six 24-hour days (which I believe He did).

Not at all. There is a great deal of evidence against Young Earth Creationism and for an old age of Earth and the Universe, but the multiverse theory, while not (yet) testable, is certainly plausible.

And there's no need to increase the star render limit to 100 Gly to simulate other universes - look at Rootax.

[Anthony_B_Russo10]

Other universes are are possible.

[SevenSpheres]

Other universes are are possible.

I never said they weren't. Read again.

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Not at all. There is a great deal of evidence against Young Earth Creationism and for an old age of Earth and the Universe, but the multiverse theory, while not (yet) testable, is certainly plausible.

AS much as there are a lot of interesting stuff to argue about, I'd rather not derail the original intention of this post. Sure, we have scientific evidence for Old Earth but I don't think CM1215 directly said that the Earth is only 6000 years old, rather than he just believed a biblical tenent that GOD made the world in 6 working days, which is by itself, just a tenet of the Christian Faith. Let's just say that this whole thing(The 6 days thing) is just a matter of Theology to deal with, and insofar as I'm concerned, CM1215 only said that in relation to my earlier statements regarding the multiverse, and not to proselytize or preach to the members so let's not argue about this further

Added after 1 minute 39 seconds:

I never said they weren't. Read again.

I don't think he was directly replying to you though. He's merely agreeing with the prior statements. Otherwise, he would have quoted you

[SevenSpheres]

GOD made the world in 6 working days, which is by itself, just a tenet of the Christian Faith.

Not in six literal days; this is only believed by fundamentalists and YECs. My intent wasn't to argue about religion (which would be against the forum rules!), but to explain that CM1215's statement wasn't logically valid. If he had said:

Believing that the multiverse exists is equivalent to believing God created the universe (which I believe He did).

this would have been a valid statement; both things are matters of belief. But he actually said (my bold):

Believing that the multiverse exists is equivalent to believing God created the universe in six 24-hour days (which I believe He did).

This is not valid; these things are not "equivalent".

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Not in six literal days. My intent wasn't to argue about religion (which would be against the forum rules!), but to explain that CM1215's statement wasn't logically valid. If he had said:

There are several Christian(Particularly Protestant) denominations that literally believe that GOD made the world in 6 24-hour days. He may be a member of one of them. Now, let's just put this behind us, otherwise SVision might feel weird seeing a theological argument erupting in his topic

[CM1215]

Not at all. There is a great deal of evidence against Young Earth Creationism and for an old age of Earth and the Universe, but the multiverse theory, while not (yet) testable, is certainly plausible.

I would disagree that there is a lot of evidence against Young Earth Creationism.
1. All evidence requires interpretation based on a worldview. Evidence cannot and does not speak for itself.
2. I could go on and on about how the Big Bang Theory defies basic tenants of physics (a simple example being the Law of Conservation of Mass-Energy, in saying that the universe came about from nothing) and, when taken to its logical conclusions, makes science itself impossible.

Not in six literal days; this is only believed by fundamentalists and YECs. My intent wasn't to argue about religion (which would be against the forum rules!), but to explain that CM1215's statement wasn't logically valid. If he had said:

Believing that the multiverse exists is equivalent to believing God created the universe (which I believe He did).

this would have been a valid statement; both things are matters of belief. But he actually said (my bold):

Believing that the multiverse exists is equivalent to believing God created the universe in six 24-hour days (which I believe He did).

This is not valid; these things are not "equivalent".

You say that they are not equivalent, and then fail to explain how they are not equivalent. As such, I do not understand why you say so. By adding "in six 24-hour days", I am only going into more detail with the position. Both the multiverse and the belief that God created the heavens and the earth in six 24-hour days cannot be tested via "scientific" procedures.

There are several Christian(Particularly Protestant) denominations that literally believe that GOD made the world in 6 24-hour days.

For future reference, I am a Christian and a Young Earth Creationist.

Now, SevenSpheres, Lafuente_Astronomy, if we wish to discuss this further (which I'd be more than happy to), we should do so via PM (if that is allowed).

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Now, SevenSpheres, Lafuente_Astronomy, if we wish to discuss this further (which I'd be more than happy to), we should do so via PM (if that is allowed).

I don't think PM allows more than 2 participants however. If you want more members to make their arguments, just make a new topic. Otherwise, Id rather that only you and SevenSpheres take it on each other, since I don't consider myself directly involved in this argument.

[SVision]

There are several Christian(Particularly Protestant) denominations that literally believe that GOD made the world in 6 24-hour days. He may be a member of one of them. Now, let's just put this behind us, otherwise SVision might feel weird seeing a theological argument erupting in his topic

It's all right .
I'm a сhristian myself, but I'm also an agnostic
Interesting topics you're discussing here, of course.

Isn't that another thing to do?

It's just that it looks like an offtop?

Okay. New Addon.

NGC 1600 galaxy group and Behemoth

In the far spherical (class E3) galaxy NGC 1600 there is a...very massive black hole.
Its mass is 18.5 billion MSol
That's quite a lot to agree on. Although there are monsters bigger than this black hole

This space demon has been given the unofficial name of Behemoth - in honor of the demon of carnal pleasures and especially gluttony .

Like this demon, the black hole ate all the stars nearest to it
The nearest hundred light years there were no stars found
Now this monster "digests" everything that was "eaten" in the last universe time.

It is also worth noting that the "Behemoth" is not located directly in the center of the galaxy.
This is most likely due to the fact that when that black hole absorbed another smaller black hole at the time of the galactic merger of NGC 1600 with another galaxy.

This is probably because NGC 1600 is in a very large group of galaxies.
The number of galaxies in this group is 210.
Galaxies of various forms but the basis is a SBa-type galaxy

installation

1)Download and unzip to the extras folder
2)Download files, create a file in the extras folder, place the files in your folder

WARNING!
Download "celestia 5441-x86-RaDecDist-Fix" cockpit for Addon operation. Otherwise Addon will not work!

Addon Author

Code: Select all

Vision - recycling the code of all previously existing objects, extension new deep space objects, processing the code of all previously available objects, adding new objects, code generation

Thanks to the authors of previous works

Code: Select all


PlutonianEmpire

Cham

sbowers

AstroBoy - "blue shift" simulating 3ds model

100fri - previously known in the narrow circles of this group's galaxy(file celestia/data/galaxy.dsc)

Special thanks

Code: Select all

Janus

Link to download

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

NGC 1600 galaxy group and Behemoth

In the far spherical (class E3) galaxy NGC 1600 there is a...very massive black hole.
Its mass is 18.5 billion MSol
That's quite a lot to agree on. Although there are monsters bigger than this black hole

This space demon has been given the unofficial name of Behemoth - in honor of the demon of carnal pleasures and especially gluttony .

Like this demon, the black hole ate all the stars nearest to it
The nearest hundred light years there were no stars found
Now this monster "digests" everything that was "eaten" in the last universe time.

It is also worth noting that the "Behemoth" is not located directly in the center of the galaxy.
This is most likely due to the fact that when that black hole absorbed another smaller black hole at the time of the galactic merger of NGC 1600 with another galaxy.

This is probably because NGC 1600 is in a very large group of galaxies.
The number of galaxies in this group is 210.
Galaxies of various forms but the basis is a SBa-type galaxy

Is the black hole in there based on fictional readings or is it based on research papers? Either way, it's all right. I just don't recall that a black hole named "Behemoth" exists but if it actually does, then t might have no name yet. It's high time we petition either NASA or the IAU to give it a name like they did Powehi

Added after 26 minutes 33 seconds:

In the far spherical (class E3) galaxy NGC 1600 there is a...very massive black hole.
Its mass is 18.5 billion MSol
That's quite a lot to agree on. Although there are monsters bigger than this black hole

I'm curious: Which black holes are confirmed to be bigger than this one? And if there ever are such monsters, have you made them already?

Added after 14 minutes 29 seconds:
There is an object that I think might interest you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OJ_287

OJ 287 is a BL Lac Galaxy approximately 3.5 billion LY away(Which is why there should be a 100 GLY galaxy and star render limit, or better yet, ditch the limit and let the limit be infinite, aka no limits) which has a binary supermassive black hole pair at its center. The primary is around 18 billion MSol, while the secondary is around 100 million MSol. The secondary orbits the primary in an orbit of around 11-12 years. But the orbit is decaying, and in around 10,000 years, the two supermassive black holes will merge together into one

[SVision]

s the black hole in there based on fictional readings or is it based on research papers? Either way, it's all right. I just don't recall that a black hole named "Behemoth" exists but if it actually does, then t might have no name yet. It's high time we petition either NASA or the IAU to give it a name like they did Powehi

Yes
This black hole really exists.
You can even read about it on Wikipedia under "NGC 1600 Galaxy" or NASA.

It's a doubtful name.
You won't find it anywhere. Only in one article dedicated to this object, the journalist "gave" the name "Behemoth" to this black hole.
I liked the name of the black hole.
I thought it was very suitable for him by its "black" nature.

Black holes are destructive in nature. They would be better suited to the names of demonic destroyers rather than light deities and their helpers. So here and has got accustomed to NGC 1600 X1 a new "name"

I have all the objects that are real.

The only possible exception would be the Lazarus system from the film Interstelar.
I prefer to explore and model real worlds rather than invent something.
Reality is much more amazing and strange than all our fantasies

OJ 287 is a BL Lac Galaxy approximately 3.5 billion LY away(Which is why there should be a 100 GLY galaxy and star render limit, or better yet, ditch the limit and let the limit be infinite, aka no limits) which has a binary supermassive black hole pair at its center. The primary is around 18 billion MSol, while the secondary is around 100 million MSol. The secondary orbits the primary in an orbit of around 11-12 years. But the orbit is decaying, and in around 10,000 years, the two supermassive black holes will merge together into one

It's already being created

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Yes
This black hole really exists.
You can even read about it on Wikipedia under "NGC 1600 Galaxy" or NASA.

Yep. I did my research as well. However, according to Wikipedia, its mass is actually 17 billion MSol. But then again, Wikipedia is a doubtful source, so obviously, don't change the mass you gave for Behemoth. It's probably the most accurate one yet

It's a doubtful name.
You won't find it anywhere. Only in one article dedicated to this object, the journalist "gave" the name "Behemoth" to this black hole.
I liked the name of the black hole.
I thought it was very suitable for him by its "black" nature.

Black holes are destructive in nature. They would be better suited to the names of demonic destroyers rather than light deities and their helpers. So here and has got accustomed to NGC 1600 X1 a new "name"

Yep I agree with you. The official naming system for Black Holes ought to be named after demons, evil creatures and evil gods of myth. Sad that a few of them have already been used for other systems, particularly Pulsars like "Lich". I would probably like the biggest black hole ever, like it is thousands to millions of parsecs in radii, and over 10 to the power of around 10000-99999 zeroes the mass of the sun, to be named after the strongest being in the Chutullu Mythos, named Azathoth

I have all the objects that are real.
The only possible exception would be the Lazarus system from the film Interstelar.
I prefer to explore and model real worlds rather than invent something.
Reality is much more amazing and strange than all our fantasies

That last sentence caught me. After all, fantasy is grounded in reality, just increased to make it unreal. But in the end, Reality always trumps our perceptions of the unreal. Who would have thought we would have black holes, or pulsars, or any of the like. Or the fact that when very dense objects such as Black Holes and Neutron Stars collide, they always make a whoop sound, not the typical destructive noises you would expect from such objects.

That being said, I downloaded the addon already, and so far, I'm enjoying it, especially since while you mentioned that there are black holes bigger than Behemoth, I do love that this black hole is among the largest you have made yet. The thing is, I just have to get used to certain black holes having much much smaller and thinner accretion disks than others, since I really admired Sagittarius A*'s accretion disk and I love the way you made the disk both seemingly a single color (Blue), and actually having a few colorful variations in it as well. I also noticed that there is no relativistic jet associated with Behemoth. Is it something you forgot to add or does your research of Behemoth showed that it does not emit relativistic jets? Either way, just as you did with your Milky Way Center and Sagittarius A* addons, I can see the love and effort you put into NGC 1600 and Behemoth as well. So, thank you for giving us this great addon, the second great adon to come from you after Milky Way Center Remove 2.0. I appreciate it

Added after 5 minutes 7 seconds:

It's already being created

You're gonna create it in spite of the limitations of Janus' stellar render being at 1 GLY? Or are you gonna find or use the Janus commit that would allow stellar render distance up to 100 GLY?

[SevenSpheres]

It's high time we petition either NASA or the IAU to give it a name like they did Powehi

Pōwehi isn't an official name.

or better yet, ditch the limit and let the limit be infinite, aka no limits

I don't think this is possible, because of the way octree works. Better to ask the devs though.

Download "celestia 5441-x86-RaDecDist-Fix" cockpit for Addon operation. Otherwise Addon will not work!

You had the wrong link; here it is. Also, why does the name Behemoth have a "^" in front of it?

But then again, Wikipedia is a doubtful source, so obviously, don't change the mass you gave for Behemoth. It's probably the most accurate one yet

Wikipedia usually has accurate information, and it sources everything. It's probably a good idea to mention sources for data in Celestia addons, too.

The official naming system for Black Holes ought to be named after demons, evil creatures and evil gods of myth.

Why should there be a naming system at all? And Pōwehi doesn't follow this theme.

Here's an updated version of my STC which renders the accent mark over the "o" in "Pōwehi" (it's still selectable by typing Powehi):

Code: Select all

"M87*:Virgo A*:M87 Central Black Hole:P\u014dwehi" {
   RA 187.704
   Dec 12.3906
   Distance 5.262e+07
   SpectralType "X"
   AbsMag 0
   Radius 19175000000 # 6.5 billion solar masses
   UniformRotation {
      Period 0.00225
   }
   InfoURL "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_87#Supermassive_black_hole"
}

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

Wikipedia usually has accurate information, and it sources everything. It's probably a good idea to mention sources for data in Celestia addons, too.

Still doesn't make it the most reliable source. I use it just for a quick read but if I really wanted to seriously delve into information regarding the object in question, which is a must for SVision, so that he can properly make his black holes and other objects in his addons, it's much better to go find articles about it in credible websites

[SVision]

I'm curious: Which black holes are confirmed to be bigger than this one? Since when I checked out Behemoth, its Radii is way larger than the Boss Black Hole you posted in the Discord months ago. And if there ever are such monsters, have you made them already?

That's where you're wrong.

Behemoth - trifle on the background of a monster under the unsightly ID SDSS J140821 .67
200 000 RSol(NGC 1600 X1) v/s 8600000 RSol (SDSS J140821
...67+025733.2).196 billion MSol...

it's Scary.

However, such black holes (according to relativistic physics) are scary from outside but good inside.
In any case, the one who falls into the black hole has (even if it is a small one) a chance to survive and stay in one piece after passing the "ringularity".

It's the most massive black hole in the world
But it hasn't been proven yet.
Such an object exists, but the mass may have strong errors

So far, the most massive proven black hole is the TON 618 quasar with its 65 billion MSol

There may be a black hole with a mass of 130 billion solar masses from LIGO (if the SDSS J140821 .67 is proven, it will be the second largest black hole).

Maybe there are monsters weighing 200-300 billion more masses than the Sun...
But so far it is not known.

Previously, it was believed that blacks couldn't gain more than 50 billion MSol
But the TON 618 and (especially) SDSS J140821 .67 (abbreviated as SDSS J1) spit relativistic jets on what we thought of them

Spoiler

Black holes are to some extent the very embodiment of death in the universe

They're destroying everything with their gravity and increasing entropy.

Nothing can leave them. Not even the light.

No one knows beyond the horizon of events like no one else knows what awaits us after life

What a man would see falling into a black hole is like "light at the end of a tunnel."

That last sentence caught me. After all, fantasy is grounded in reality, just increased to make it unreal. But in the end, Reality always trumps our perceptions of the unreal. Who would have thought we would have black holes, or pulsars, or any of the like. Or the fact that when very dense objects such as Black Holes and Neutron Stars collide, they always make a whoop sound, not the typical destructive noises you would expect from such objects.

That being said, I downloaded the addon already, and so far, I'm enjoying it, especially since while you mentioned that there are black holes bigger than Behemoth, I do love that this black hole is among the largest you have made yet. The thing is, I just have to get used to certain black holes having much much smaller and thinner accretion disks than others, since I really admired Sagittarius A*'s accretion disk and I love the way you made the disk both seemingly a single color (Blue), and actually having a few colorful variations in it as well. I also noticed that there is no relativistic jet associated with Behemoth. Is it something you forgot to add or does your research of Behemoth showed that it does not emit relativistic jets? Either way, just as you did with your Milky Way Center and Sagittarius A* addons, I can see the love and effort you put into NGC 1600 and Behemoth as well. So, thank you for giving us this great addon, the second great adon to come from you after Milky Way Center Remove 2.0. I appreciate it

NGC 1600 X1 has no jets. It's not an active black hole.

Thank you !
Yes. I do put a lot of effort into my creations. But I like to do it.

To me, it's not just black holes and stuff.
With the help of Celestia I can leave the "sinful Earth" and with the help of it and my computer I will go to explore the universe. for me it is regarded as a cosmic journey. with the help of various data I can know the world and Celestia can help me to visualize this or that object.
And it's beautiful .

About reality and fantasy
That's a yes, it is.
And who knows... maybe there are, and we're about to open them up to the planet's quark stars, etc.
Or maybe there are dark atoms and they're mysterious dark matter.

I think we will learn a lot more about our world in time

Added after 11 minutes 15 seconds:
I'll reply to all the other messages later
I'm going to bed now. I have three in the morning

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

That's alright. I yearn to visit other universes yet our own universe isn't fully explored in its entirely either. So, we should take little cosmic steps first.

[SVision]

Pōwehi isn't an official name.

Still, her name is more official than NGC 1600 X1

You had the wrong link; here it is. Also, why does the name Behemoth have a "^" in front of it?

I'm confused. I'm gonna fix this.
About ^
I once wanted to separate the objects into more or less officially recognized names
And those who have a un. name.
Previously this was done in parentheses ()
But then I gave it up. It's uncomfortable to put it in the search field.

But then again, Wikipedia is a doubtful source, so obviously, don't change the mass you gave for Behemoth. It's probably the most accurate one yet

Wikipedia usually has accurate information, and it sources everything. It's probably a good idea to mention sources for data in Celestia addons, too.

Still doesn't make it the most reliable source. I use it just for a quick read but if I really wanted to seriously delve into information regarding the object in question, which is a must for SVision, so that he can properly make his black holes and other objects in his addons, it's much better to go find articles about it in credible websites

Wikipedia's pretty good.
I've noticed that she's not a very reliable source only in topics far from science and more related to life.
I didn't see any errors in the astronomical part of Wikipedia
I can also write in Wiki favor that I personally got to know the exoplanets

But I still think that if there are primary sources, it's better to use them

Why should there be a naming system at all? And Pōwehi doesn't follow this theme.

Here's an updated version of my STC which renders the accent mark over the "o" in "Pōwehi" (it's still selectable by typing Powehi):

It's difficult to write why a naming system should exist
On the other hand, the planets were previously named after the gods. Why not give black holes the names of antipodes?

About the Pōwehi
Well, that's a good thing.
Do you mind if I take some of your data for my Pōwehi?
She is almost ready from me
Unless it's time to figure out the color of the accretion disc with its inclination and the inclination of the jets.
Ideally, to change the jets to narrower ones, but that's not possible yet.

That's alright. I yearn to visit other universes yet our own universe isn't fully explored in its entirely either. So, we should take little cosmic steps first.

To be honest, I would like to look from the outside at our universe (if it is not flat and infinite) at the other universes (if there are any) at the space where the multiverse universes are located and at what is farther away from them

But that's not possible yet. Science hasn't gotten to the point of knowing if it's all there or not.
Well, that's a shame.

But in Celestia, it would be cool if we created a multiverse
It would even make Celestia stand out from the competition, though not much.

Added after 10 minutes 25 seconds:
Does anyone have any idea how to get inside the black hole to the singularity?

I think we need to find a funnel model somewhere
Only here's where

Added after 11 minutes 13 seconds:

You're gonna create it in spite of the limitations of Janus' stellar render being at 1 GLY? Or are you gonna find or use the Janus commit that would allow stellar render distance up to 100 GLY?

Janus, has restrictions on the distance bigger than 1 GLY
Stellar objects with its extension only cease to be displayed if they are beyond the boundaries of the visible universe
After 1 GLY, you just start having problems with coordinates. It's impossible to point a star (black hole) exactly at the galaxy no matter how hard you try.
The reason is unknown. Probably the outdated mathematical apparatus of Celestia is not working properly.

But they will be displayed

Otherwise, I wouldn't be able to show you SDSS J1 or any other black holes

Added after 3 minutes 16 seconds:
I've become something of a black hole lord of Celestia, though I'm supposed to be doing exoplanets

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

I've become something of a black hole lord of Celestia, though I'm supposed to be doing exoplanets

Actually, it's better if you do Black Hole addons from now on if you want. Many people have been making exoplanet addons, and as such, it is too common. Whereas in Black Holes, few have made addons but so far, you're the best at making Black Hole addons. So just continue to reign as the Black Hole Lord as long as you want. I'll support you along the way

Added after 3 hours 11 minutes:
Actually, I have to correct myself: You can still create any addons that you want, especially if they would actually enrich Celestia's realistic experience. However, I think the Black Holes and any other addons related to it should be your focus, since so far, you're the only currently active Celestia member who knows how to make proper Black Hole addons, and yours look the best so far. That being said, while your creativity is golden on all addons that you make, it shines the best in ironically the only objects that light could not escape: Black Holes

Added after 12 minutes 2 seconds:

But in Celestia, it would be cool if we created a multiverse
It would even make Celestia stand out from the competition, though not much.

Maybe if somehow, we can make a tab system for Celestia, conceptually similar to the tabs in most internet accessing software like Opera, Google Chrome, Firefox, Safari and the like, in which each tab contains the Universe as rendered by Celestia, and anyone who makes addons can place their addons, be it fictional or non-fictional on to different Celestia "tabs" of their choosing. The result is that in effect, Celestia becomes a "Multiversal Simulator", with each tab a universe in itself, and different from one another by their tab identity and number, as well as their contents within

For example, if Tab 1 is the original, unedited Celestia simulated universe, and Tab 2 is the Celestia Universe with several fictional addons, it would mean that one does not have to litter the original universe AKA Tab 1 with his fictional addons, which may ruin future experience or accuracy. Instead, Tab 2 can be used to store and display all the fictional addons that the creator assigns to Tab 2. The assigning of the addons to tabs can be made in their respective files, and that in Celestia, by default you are already in Tab 1, and you have to open Tab 2 just to see your addons. Also, for better differentiation and distinction, you can rename your tabs with anything you want to write, so as to give your respective "universes" represented as tabs in Celestia unique identities.

However, that's gonna be a very big challenge for the devs to do, especially since they haven't optimized the arrangement and categorization of the Database yet through the AstroDB Branch. Perhaps this is meant for the far future of Celestia. However, if you think you can make such a thing, feel free too. Just make it yourself first as a branch, then perfect it to your perfections as per your perfectionist standards, and once that's made perfectly perfect, you may ask the devs to merge your branch with the Master Branch, and then we will see its compatibility. Either way, this will be a very big and powerful improvement of Celestia, and would further make it distinct from other astronomy software by a very huge margin

[SevenSpheres]

But I still think that if there are primary sources, it's better to use them

True. I suggested mentioning your sources somewhere in your addon. In a readme file maybe.

Do you mind if I take some of your data for my Pōwehi?

Not at all. (The rotation period isn't real, it's just copied from Sgr A*)

you're the only currently active Celestia member who knows how to make proper Black Hole addons

No, he's just the only active member who does make black hole addons. In fact I made a version of the Cygnus X-1 addon with a proper black hole definition.

For example, if Tab 1 is the original, unedited Celestia simulated universe, and Tab 2 is the Celestia Universe with several fictional addons, it would mean that one does not have to litter the original universe AKA Tab 1 with his fictional addons, which may ruin future experience or accuracy. Instead, Tab 2 can be used to store and display all the fictional addons that the creator assigns to Tab 2. The assigning of the addons to tabs can be made in their respective files, and that in Celestia, by default you are already in Tab 1, and you have to open Tab 2 just to see your addons. Also, for better differentiation and distinction, you can rename your tabs with anything you want to write, so as to give your respective "universes" represented as tabs in Celestia unique identities.

Here is how to do essentially this. I have several versions of Celestia that load different addons.

[Lafuente_Astronomy]

No, he's just the only active member who does make black hole addons. In fact I made a version of the Cygnus X-1 addon with a proper black hole definition.

I said that in the context that SVision is the one who usually makes Black Holes. A few others have done so but only once or twice, and they mostly focused on Exoplanets, stars, etc. AKA, they are not really active in that part. You however, you may feel free to join SVision in making Black Holes as well.

Here is how to do essentially this. I have several versions of Celestia that load different addons.

That's a good gem you found in there. It would really help with those who have too many addons. But in SVision's context of wishing that Celestia should be a "multiverse simulator", the tab system can be included as well. Meaning that one can put addons in Tab 1, and through the steps that was shown, can enable or disable some of those addons, and the user can do the same for those in Tab 2.