Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Mel Vixen
« on: December 03, 2011, 11:27:36 PM »

Ceres is one of the dwarfplanets in our solarsystem as well as the roman Goddes of agriculture. The gravity of 0.028G is pretty weak but strong enough to keep you on the object if you leap into the air.

For sol exist 5 dwarfplanets namely: Pluto, Ceres, Eris (1 Moon) which was formaly know as Xena, Haumea(2 moons) and Makemake. Furthermore exist 4 ""nearly certain" dwarf planets which are Orcus (1 moon), Quaoar(1 moon), 2007 OR10 (nicknamed at first "Snow white" later 7th Dwarf because its a actually rather red) and Sedna.
Posted by: TheDeadlyShoe
« on: December 03, 2011, 07:53:31 PM »

Quote
I have considered adding exoplanets to real stars. The issue is that the system generation is so complex, it would be difficult to intervene in the correct place . I will definitely look at this at some point though, as well as updating the Sol system to use the new dwarf planet definition and add Eris, Sedna, etc.

Steve
Ceres? :X
Posted by: Owen Quillion
« on: December 03, 2011, 06:42:30 PM »

Exoplanet Encyclopedia entry (the main page still has it listed in Latest News as the first transiting circumbinary planet)

Here's the Wikipedia page on the system

Here's a Wikipedia also a Wikipedia page that says there are several older confirmed ones, presumably by methods other than transiting.

Here's an article from Sky & Telescope about the Kepler-16 planet.

I remember reading about this back in September and getting pretty excited; it's not exactly Tatooine  or anything, but still pretty neat. (it's Saturn-esque, if I remember correctly)
Posted by: Beersatron
« on: December 03, 2011, 05:04:22 PM »


..............
 A system has been discovered in which a planet orbits around two suns, which orbit around each other.
..............



Link?
Posted by: Zed 6
« on: December 03, 2011, 04:20:55 PM »

As of December 2, 2011, a total of 707 confirmed exoplanets are listed in the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia, including a few that were confirmations of controversial claims from the late 1980s. That count includes 580 planets in planetary systems and 84 planets within multiple planetary systems. A system has been discovered in which a planet orbits around two suns, which orbit around each other.

As of February 2011, NASA's Kepler mission had identified 1,235 unconfirmed planetary candidates associated with 997 host stars, based on the first four months of data from the space-based telescope, including 54 that may be in the habitable zone.

Most known exoplanets orbit stars roughly similar to our own Sun, that is, main-sequence stars of spectral categories F, G, or K. One reason is that planet search programs have tended to concentrate on such stars. But in addition, statistical analysis indicates that lower-mass stars (red dwarfs, of spectral category M) are less likely to have planets massive enough to detect. Observations using the Spitzer Space Telescope indicate that stars of spectral category O, which are much hotter than our Sun, produce a photo-evaporation effect that inhibits planetary formation.

Ordinary stars are composed mainly of the light elements hydrogen and helium. They also contain a small proportion of heavier elements such as iron, and this fraction is referred to as a star's metallicity. Stars of higher metallicity are much more likely to have planets, and the planets they have tend to be more massive than those of lower-metallicity stars. It has also been shown that stars with planets are more likely to be deficient in lithium

Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: December 03, 2011, 02:49:17 PM »

Steve now that Exoplanets get discovered almost dayly any plans of adding them to the appropriate stars? Also 1800 stars is a lot :P thanks for the effort.

I have considered adding exoplanets to real stars. The issue is that the system generation is so complex, it would be difficult to intervene in the correct place :). I will definitely look at this at some point though, as well as updating the Sol system to use the new dwarf planet definition and add Eris, Sedna, etc.

Steve
Posted by: Mel Vixen
« on: December 03, 2011, 02:30:51 AM »

Steve now that Exoplanets get discovered almost dayly any plans of adding them to the appropriate stars? Also 1800 stars is a lot :P thanks for the effort.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: December 02, 2011, 01:36:54 PM »

Zubenelgenubi

This binary system is already included as Alpha-1 Librae and Alpha-2 Librae. I'll change the names in the database to Zubenelgenubi-1 and Zubenelgenubi-2

Steve
Posted by: Theodidactus
« on: December 02, 2011, 01:11:08 AM »

Quote from: Steve Walmsley link=topic=1654. msg15253#msg15253 date=1252245772

If anyone has their own favourite stars (or has named one for their wife/girlfriend <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile. gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" />), let me know and I will include it in Aurora's DB.

Steve

 Zubenelgenubi
Posted by: Randy
« on: November 19, 2009, 12:38:36 PM »

The real limit will be the database size. Access will kill your game long before you get through the complete star list...

Too bad there is no real alternative other than sql server express edition. This would at least double the database size limit, but I believe it would introduce a whole host of other issues...
Posted by: welchbloke
« on: November 05, 2009, 01:56:59 PM »

Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "waresky"
Awesome Steve..

U have think how many Stars System atm (in a Quad Core IBM CPU) can manage an actual PC?
No idea :D
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: November 05, 2009, 01:52:07 PM »

Quote from: "waresky"
Awesome Steve..

U have think how many Stars System atm (in a Quad Core IBM CPU) can manage an actual PC?
No idea :). A lot will depend on how many system bodies are in each system. I imagine you will run out of time to play before you run out of systems though.

Steve
Posted by: waresky
« on: November 05, 2009, 01:43:28 PM »

Awesome Steve..

U have think how many Stars System atm (in a Quad Core IBM CPU) can manage an actual PC?
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: November 05, 2009, 01:33:29 PM »

I have added an extra 800 real star systems for v4.5, taking the total to 1800. This includes most systems out to about 67 light years from Earth and many of the well known stars out to 5000 LY or so. I am also working my way through each constellation at the moment, adding all the stars with Bayer-Flamsteed designations. So far I have covered  Andromeda , Antlia, Apus, Aquarius, Aquila, ARA, Aries, Auriga, Boötes, Caelum, Camelopardus, Capricornus, Carina, Cassiopeia, Centaurus, Cepheus, Cetus, Chamaeleon, Circinus and Canis Major. It may be some time before I get to Vulpecula :)
                   
Steve
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: October 04, 2009, 12:39:37 PM »

Quote from: "welchbloke"
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"
Quote from: "welchbloke"
Looking good Steve.  What size are you planning to expand the stellar DB to?
I'm not sure. 1000 systems is plenty for most campaigns so I there is no urgency to expand it. Even so, I will likely have the occasional session of adding more systems when I am bored with programming :)
A LOT! :), which has allowed me to spend a lot of time on Aurora. That is one of the reasons why Aurora has advanced a lot faster than SA. Another reason is that I am no longer trying to squeeze board game mechanics into a computer game :)

It definitely is several man-years though. Especially during the last 3-4 years when I have probably spent more time working on Aurora than most people will have spent at work.

Steve