Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate  (Read 5378 times)

Xriqxa

  • *****
  • Posts: 1441
  • 01000011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01110101 01101
Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« on: August 17, 2014, 03:07:24 PM »
So while I was making a solar system I noticed the Goldilocks Zone seems to be a little farther out than it should.

I placed a planet about halfway in between the middle and outer edge of the green area, but it was still frozen.

Or maybe it's the freezing and boiling points of water that's wrong, since I accidentally created an oceana planet that 108 C, which is impossible unless the planet's atmosphere was ultra dense. The planet did have quite a sky, but I don't think US2 simulates pressure yet.

I personally believe that this is a priority fix, because water is one of the most important chemicals in making solar systems and comets, which I'm sure customers are bound to be making a ton of.

Percebob

  • ****
  • Posts: 30
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2014, 04:21:53 PM »
I concur. 

kly108

  • ***
  • Posts: 27
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2014, 07:06:42 PM »
Have you tried increasing the atmospheric mass/pressure? When I place a planet inbetween the green zone and adjust the atmosphere I can get the planet to ~30 C

Cryo

  • *****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2014, 07:17:44 PM »
it's really finding the right planet that's Compatible i had to edit a LOT of material's to make G6-38 a habitable world, the Co2 is low, so it's cold but not too cold i also made a warm world Voss and it was just right it's in the 70's and 60's

Geers

  • ****
  • Posts: 58
  • If you try hard you crash hard
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2014, 07:19:34 PM »
Habitable zones are a broken concept anyway.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2014, 09:31:47 PM by Geers »

Cryo

  • *****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2014, 07:21:09 PM »
that's true and not true at the same time.... ???

kly108

  • ***
  • Posts: 27
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2014, 07:25:13 PM »
it's really finding the right planet that's Compatible i had to edit a LOT of material's to make G6-38 a habitable world, the Co2 is low, so it's cold but not too cold i also made a warm world Voss and it was just right it's in the 70's and 60's
You can adjust it yourself if you have some patience, in fact you could have a planet in the green zone put a crap ton of atmospheric mass and it would turn into a heaping ball of lava

Cryo

  • *****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2014, 10:00:43 PM »
i'ma bit confused here are you implying that i lack patience? or in general  ???

tygoo7

  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2014, 10:52:28 PM »
I noticed this too.

Electrodynamix

  • *****
  • Posts: 77
  • Australian Alpha Tester and Astronomer
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2014, 11:25:02 PM »
In Universe Sandbox 1, the habitable zone included factors like luminosity and heat.  Obviously, life here on earth needs heat and light.  Also, a balanced amount of radiation is needed for gradual mutations in DNA (evolution), and also for atmospheric processes.  The habitable zones in US2 might still include this. (haven't actually proven my assumption right yet)

Xriqxa

  • *****
  • Posts: 1441
  • 01000011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01110101 01101
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2014, 01:25:07 AM »
It does. I added over a thousand degrees C of Green House Effect and it was still frozen near -100 C.

Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2014, 01:44:17 AM »
So while I was making a solar system I noticed the Goldilocks Zone seems to be a little farther out than it should.

I placed a planet about halfway in between the middle and outer edge of the green area, but it was still frozen.

Or maybe it's the freezing and boiling points of water that's wrong, since I accidentally created an oceana planet that 108 C, which is impossible unless the planet's atmosphere was ultra dense. The planet did have quite a sky, but I don't think US2 simulates pressure yet.

I personally believe that this is a priority fix, because water is one of the most important chemicals in making solar systems and comets, which I'm sure customers are bound to be making a ton of.

The 'goldilocks zone' is not a guarantee of liquid water. It is merely the range in which, other factors permitting, liquid water can exist. Without a sufficient atmosphere, mere presence in the zone will not - except at its closest end - mean liquid water. Consider this: the Earth rests just inside the beginning of Sol's habitable zone, but without its atmosphere, would be at only -18C. Obviously you'll end up with some sort of atmosphere with a large world, but that doesn't guarantee liquid water! And, in most cases, the further you go out the less likely you will be to have liquid water from solar action as heat from a star drops off remarkably quickly even within the habitable zone. Consider: Mars and Ceres both lie within the habitable zone.

Ocean planets of very high temperatures are actually possible. Ocean planets are not just worlds with some water on them; they are worlds almost made of water, and as a result they are -very- odd. On a hot ocean planet, the atmosphere is not actually distinct from the surface, similar to a gas giant, and the ocean floor is made of exotic ice. Any world that can be described as an ocean planet while being close to the sun will have a very dense atmosphere and attain supercriticality. Consider: Water vapour cannot escape the gravitational pull of most large or earth-like worlds unless they are -very- close to the sun.

It does. I added over a thousand degrees C of Green House Effect and it was still frozen near -100 C.

Did you do so just by typing it in, or by tweaking the CO2 ppmv?

Xriqxa

  • *****
  • Posts: 1441
  • 01000011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01110101 01101
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2014, 01:50:40 AM »
So while I was making a solar system I noticed the Goldilocks Zone seems to be a little farther out than it should.

I placed a planet about halfway in between the middle and outer edge of the green area, but it was still frozen.

Or maybe it's the freezing and boiling points of water that's wrong, since I accidentally created an oceana planet that 108 C, which is impossible unless the planet's atmosphere was ultra dense. The planet did have quite a sky, but I don't think US2 simulates pressure yet.

I personally believe that this is a priority fix, because water is one of the most important chemicals in making solar systems and comets, which I'm sure customers are bound to be making a ton of.

The 'goldilocks zone' is not a guarantee of liquid water. It is merely the range in which, other factors permitting, liquid water can exist. Without a sufficient atmosphere, mere presence in the zone will not - except at its closest end - mean liquid water. Consider this: the Earth rests just inside the beginning of Sol's habitable zone, but without its atmosphere, would be at only -18C. Obviously you'll end up with some sort of atmosphere with a large world, but that doesn't guarantee liquid water! And, in most cases, the further you go out the less likely you will be to have liquid water from solar action as heat from a star drops off remarkably quickly even within the habitable zone. Consider: Mars and Ceres both lie within the habitable zone.

Ocean planets of very high temperatures are actually possible. Ocean planets are not just worlds with some water on them; they are worlds almost made of water, and as a result they are -very- odd. On a hot ocean planet, the atmosphere is not actually distinct from the surface, similar to a gas giant, and the ocean floor is made of exotic ice. Any world that can be described as an ocean planet while being close to the sun will have a very dense atmosphere and attain supercriticality. Consider: Water vapour cannot escape the gravitational pull of most large or earth-like worlds unless they are -very- close to the sun.

But it had an Earth like atmosphere initially...

It does. I added over a thousand degrees C of Green House Effect and it was still frozen near -100 C.

Did you do so just by typing it in, or by tweaking the CO2 ppmv?
[/quote] I tweaked the green house effect itself, went up to more than 1000 K and the world is still frozen. I switched the system to Celsius rather than Kelvin but the numbers didn't change.

Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2014, 02:35:46 AM »
Try doing it by changing CO2 PPM. The greenhouse value is not responsive.

kly108

  • ***
  • Posts: 27
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2014, 08:42:32 AM »
i'ma bit confused here are you implying that i lack patience? or in general  ???
Just in general

Cryo

  • *****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2014, 02:37:47 PM »
Okay here's what i do get a habitable planet i speed up time (also change the temp and and Green house level)

wal310

  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2014, 02:27:39 PM »
by changing the greenhouse affect and atmospheric pressure you can make Pluto into a molten ball of rock (with a crushing atmosphere, which might not be too habitable) so habitable areas show you a general area to place a planet to have it's atmosphere not at ludicrous pressures and also for it to have enough heat from the sun to possibly sustain life.

Unnamed25

  • *****
  • Posts: 159
  • o hai
Re: Habitable zones seem to be incredibly innacurate
« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2014, 08:03:46 PM »
The habitable zone for white dwarfs and high(4+ solar mass) mass stars is broken too