What do you want Universe Sandbox 3 to have?

[Kevin1994]

cloud system for the terrain planets and gas giants:

1:put a cloud system for planets if it's possible the clouds will give a realistic feel to the planets.

2:if this is possible can you put a lighting effect for planets?

3:for gas giants can you put a dynamic cloud band systems  it would be cool to see the clouds whip around the planet.

4:went asteroids hit the clouds make them move away form the impact zone.

[Kevin1994]

water effects: if possible for US3:

1: put water reflections for terrain worlds

2:put water vapor went the planet gets to close to it's host star.

3:put water to freeze or lock up in ice went the planet gets to far from it's host star.

4: put water light reflection went the Cameron faces the star.

[Kevin1994]

Spaceships!:if possible:

well this is just a crazy idea but if you can somehow  this in well... that's just great!!

1:put some  spaceships physics and model for US3

2:put some Cameron angles for the spaceships

3:put a burning up effects went it gets to close to the planet

4:put some glow effects went the ship is moving

[Kevin1994]

planetary collision,asteroids impact:

Hahahaha this one will be hard.

1:put planetary ties went they get to close to each other.

2:put some like N-body sim into the collisions

3:went a asteroids get to close to planet let them start to drag across the atmosphere and break a part on impact

4: let asteroids leave impact craters on the planet

5:went the asteroid impacts the planet let some of the asteroid fly off into space and land back into other parts of the planet and rain back down all across the planet.

[vh]

planetary collision,asteroids impact:

Hahahaha this one will be hard.

1:put planetary ties went they get to close to each other.

2:put some like N-body sim into the collisions

3:went a asteroids get to close to planet let them start to drag across the atmosphere and break a part on impact

4: let asteroids leave impact craters on the planet

5:went the asteroid impacts the planet let some of the asteroid fly off into space and land back into other parts of the planet and rain back down all across the planet.

Hmm, they already do the #4. Do you mean physically for thr 3d model? That'd be pretty hard and i can't imagine more than a simple circle.

#5. Intersting idea. Maybe an option to set a speed. Under this speed, objects bounce. Above this speed, objects collide.

[smjjames]

planetary collision,asteroids impact:

Hahahaha this one will be hard.

1:put planetary ties went they get to close to each other.

2:put some like N-body sim into the collisions

3:went a asteroids get to close to planet let them start to drag across the atmosphere and break a part on impact

4: let asteroids leave impact craters on the planet

5:went the asteroid impacts the planet let some of the asteroid fly off into space and land back into other parts of the planet and rain back down all across the planet.

Well, there is a completely new collision system, but none of us (other than Dan and the other devs) know any details about it yet.

For #3, Dan has said that he wants to implement atmospheric drag.

For number 1, are you talking about the relation lines when you push ; ? The relation lines sound like the same thing as what you mean, otherwise that one needs clarification.

[vh]

Spaceships!:if possible:

well this is just a crazy idea but if you can somehow  this in well... that's just great!!

1:put some  spaceships physics and model for US3

2:put some Cameron angles for the spaceships

3:put a burning up effects went it gets to close to the planet

4:put some glow effects went the ship is moving

#1 spaceship physics don't differ from any other physics that govern the way planets and bodies move?
#3  Isn't there an emit light checkbox? i think but not sure.
#4 same as 3

[Kevin1994]

Stars:

Brown Dawfs: should have a very active srface. like very second the star sould give off a massive solar flear and it's so red and dim itmay look a jupiter in some way.

Rew Dawfs or M class star: these guys are like the brown dawfs and more active in thier solar flaers they sould look like a star that is going into hyperdrive in solar actives.

Organ Dawfs K class stars : they are more clam and have less solar actives they sould look like our sun but smaller but they have a organ tined to thier color.

yellow Dawfs G class stars : Our sun is in this same class of stars and sould have a very slow solar actives a few massive solar flaers might go off here and there.

white-yellow giants F class stars : these stars are capable of going super nova and have some times massive super flaers. this can sript  a planet bear of it's atmosphere. they sould look like our sun but bigger

white or white-blue giants A-B class stars planets can't form here beacuse of it's short life spand they have they most volite solar flears and can go super nova these stars can form blackholes they sould look like our sun but looks like on stroids.

blue-purple super giant O class stars: these are the biggest of the big hyper super massives solar fears can happen on these stars and can go hyper nova they can form massive blackholes they have a very blue or purple look to thire colors.

[Kevin1994]

Black holes: in the US3 black holes are going  to be awesome in the next Major update.

1:should have  a pulling effects on stars and most likely pull the star a part.

2:black holes should have a a massive disc went the star is being engulf by the black hole

3: should have rays shooting out form it's polar regions went it's eating a star.

I will think of more ideas for the black holes later on. but I will need to move on.

[FiahOwl]

Stars:

Brown Dawfs: should have a very active srface. like very second the star sould give off a massive solar flear and it's so red and dim itmay look a jupiter in some way.

Rew Dawfs or M class star: these guys are like the brown dawfs and more active in thier solar flaers they sould look like a star that is going into hyperdrive in solar actives.

Organ Dawfs K class stars : they are more clam and have less solar actives they sould look like our sun but smaller but they have a organ tined to thier color.

yellow Dawfs G class stars : Our sun is in this same class of stars and sould have a very slow solar actives a few massive solar flaers might go off here and there.

white-yellow giants F class stars : these stars are capable of going super nova and have some times massive super flaers. this can sript  a planet bear of it's atmosphere. they sould look like our sun but bigger

white or white-blue giants A-B class stars planets can't form here beacuse of it's short life spand they have they most volite solar flears and can go super nova these stars can form blackholes they sould look like our sun but looks like on stroids.

blue-purple super giant O class stars: these are the biggest of the big hyper super massives solar fears can happen on these stars and can go hyper nova they can form massive blackholes they have a very blue or purple look to thire colors.

Kolwut, is English your native language?

[Kevin1994]

Time it's self: it's been cool going backwards time for billions of years into the past and fast forward billions or possibly trillions of years into the future. this tool needs a update.

1:Speed-accuracy needs a major update it needs to be improve to keep the planets orbits more stable to prevent the planets form flying off into deep space.

I really don't know any thing else to improve for this side.  

[smjjames]

1:Speed-accuracy needs a major update it needs to be improve to keep the planets orbits more stable to prevent the planets form flying off into deep space.

Its going to be a completely new engine, so we should see lots of improvement in that respect.

And Kevin, you need to seriously spell check reply 37.

[Sycosys]

OpenCL Multithreading across all available cores on my CPU/GPU

[vh]

Time it's self: it's been cool going backwards time for billions of years into the past and fast forward billions or possibly trillions of years into the future. this tool needs a update.

1:Speed-accuracy needs a major update it needs to be improve to keep the planets orbits more stable to prevent the planets form flying off into deep space.

I really don't know any thing else to improve for this side. 

what do you mean? i'm pretty sure it's physically impossible to simulate faster and having it all stable

Although what if 'orbit' were calculated and then the body was locked inside that path until something happened. Like vector graphics, *analogyised*

[Dan Dixon]

Just posting an email I received with many feature requests from a D. Nelson:

Same backgrounds, realistic atmospheres, lowest mass for planets to become very nearly perfectly spherical is 0.10 moons, no errors/bugs on orbital reactions non-flat rings added on the ring tab(fixes fomalhaut\'s dust ring), true oblateness changer, custom textures(like on the current version)models(3ds,x,obj) usable, space shuttle model added, custom colors, object info shown & saved mars moons with accurate textures & models, haumea 25% egg shaped, not oblateness but streched on 2 sides as much as 25%.Comet Tails, 2d & 3D Grids, Better Collisions, Better Asteroid Models/Textures & Everything saved.

[Kevin1994]

A star sound this will be a cool this in hearing the sounds of the stars:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ogyKgV4KN4&feature=player_embedded#!

[mrt127]

A star sound this will be a cool this in hearing the sounds of the stars:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ogyKgV4KN4&feature=player_embedded#!

Perhaps, even if Dan decides to put star sounds in the game, I reckon there should be a mute button because after about 10 mins it could give you a headache. 

[FiahOwl]

A star sound this will be a cool this in hearing the sounds of the stars:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ogyKgV4KN4&feature=player_embedded#!

Perhaps, even if Dan decides to put star sounds in the game, I reckon there should be a mute button because after about 10 mins it could give you a headache. 

[clockworks]

currently dust and gas are shown by particles. Nebulae are possible as objects, but you'd have to make a 3d model and it'd be a solid, not a liquid or gas. It might be possible to add them, but the simulater would need a fluid dynamics thingy

nebulae could be built as galaxies... when you zoom into a galaxy it's nothing much but zoom out and it's big and beautiful

[vh]

stationary dust...icic. But they wouldn't have mass..not that that's a problem

[Astronomical]

1) Have an "ejection-proof" check to prevent bodies from being launched by large timesteps.

If they can't be processed properly at those speeds, it would just "disable" the effect of gravity on the object and keep using the last recorded full orbit. (Moons and planets that are close enough to a large body to be ejected by a large timestep typically don't have a big gravitational effect anyway, and they surely don't influence other objects in the system if they are catapulted out at the speed of light!)

2) Calculated absolute and apparent magnitudes

It'd make it easier to judge the brightness of an object if those two were listed under the detail list that appears when right-clicking on something.

3) Have auto-orbit select the barycenter in a multiple star (or planet) system.

4) Have an option to allow barycenters and landing points to be hidden from view

Currently, I just make them black, because when I'm viewing a system from a landing point, by default it leaves a white dot in the middle of the screen.

5) Temperature-based textures.

Possibly, Universe Sandbox could have an "advanced" tab underneath the default texture area to allow the user to place temperature ranges for other textures. Universe Sandbox would then just blend from one texture to the other once the planet starts to approach the edges of two texture ranges. This effect would be especially awesome if different sections of a planet had temperature calculations. (Dynamic ice caps, even on tidally locked planets!)

6) An optional reflection map for planets

It would be really cool to make rocky bodies with noticeably varied surfaces

7) Tidal bulges based on rotational speeds or gravitational effects

8 ) Temperature changes based upon large impacts (i.e. a molten Earth if it is struck by Mars, somewhat related to 5)

9) Light falloff for dust particles.

Currently, dust is just as bright at long distances from light sources as it is when right next to them, making it hard to view dust-filled systems from large distances. Similarly, stars don't have a significant light falloff with distance, either.

10) An optional aurora effect for atmospheres

11) A label option that only indicates major bodies (i.e. stars and planets, but not moons)

12) This is stretching it, but an option to convert all bodies not contained within the nearest solar system into a background texture.

Basically, if you selected "Convert to background" while viewing our solar system, any other solar entities are placed onto a texture sheet that can be used as a stellar background in Universe Sandbox. That way, someone could create their own constellations and galaxy placements without being overly taxing on the system.

13) The ability to place reference points on a background image, effectively allowing stars to be labelled without needing them to be processed in the physics engine. Of course, that means that you couldn't zoom in on them and view space from their point-of-view, but it could help out low-end systems. (ties into 12)

14) An infrared viewing mode.

15) Orbital and rotational options to make it easier to achieve resonances. (Other than 1:1 tidal locking, of course)

16) Satellite and spacecraft models.

It's been mentioned countless times, but it would be very cool to view space from an object with a controllable velocity!

[smjjames]

For #1, I'm not sure how that would be achieved.

#3 is definetly being worked on, or rather the auto orbit or orbit parent function needs to be reworked and it does need to work properly for binaries, etc.

I'd like to add to #9 in that there needs to be more of a fade out with distance from the star (or stars) rather than a sudden cut off at 100 AU with default brightness settings.

Oh yea, how about when there are two or more suns (well, two or three would be reasonable), the planets don't look like someone took a magnifying glass and focused it on the object.

[vh]

#1, smjjames, i think Dan referred to it as a 'jettison issue' here (last posts) http://universesandbox.com/forum/index.php/topic,6009.0.html

so it is fixable maybe with this 'smoothing' although i'm not sure if it applies to objects as well as particles...

"Oh yea, how about when there are two or more suns (well, two or three would be reasonable), the planets don't look like someone took a magnifying glass and focused it on the object."
Hmm but isn't that how they'd really look in real life?

[smjjames]

"Oh yea, how about when there are two or more suns (well, two or three would be reasonable), the planets don't look like someone took a magnifying glass and focused it on the object."
Hmm but isn't that how they'd really look in real life?

I don't really know to be honest. I know there would be increased brightness, thats clear.

[vh]

11) A label option that only indicates major bodies (i.e. stars and planets, but not moons)

As of right now, planets and moons aren't seperated by class. If you place a random 1,000km radius object, it's impossible to tell whether it is a moon or planet. Past a certain mass, an object becomes a star and has luminosity, but i don't see how you could differentiate a planet from a moon

[Dan Dixon]

Wow... another great list of ideas.

Thanks for this.


The 'jettison issue' is a combination of high time steps and lack of smoothing.

Gravitational smoothing is well explained by an paper written by Thomas Greenleaf:

"There are two problems related to the force of gravity. Firstly it has infinite range and secondly it goes towards infinity for point masses when their distance goes towards zero.

The infinite gravity at zero distance is dealt with through gravitational smoothing in which the point gravity source is replaced with a source with a non zero radius. Obtaining the gravitational potential is then changed from a point sample to what is in essence an integral of the sources mass distribution over a volume.

The problem with the infinite range of gravity is dealt with exactly the opposite way around through hardening. Here a distributed collection of gravity sources will be approximated by a point source rather than as the sum of individual potentials."

http://www.greenleaf.dk/projects/sph_astronomy
(article link at the bottom of the page)

[Astronomical]

As of right now, planets and moons aren't seperated by class. If you place a random 1,000km radius object, it's impossible to tell whether it is a moon or planet. Past a certain mass, an object becomes a star and has luminosity, but i don't see how you could differentiate a planet from a moon

US could classify a planet as any non-light-emitting body that has a mass higher than 0.01 Earths and is orbiting a solar body. (Or the reverse, any object that is smaller than 0.01 Earths or orbiting around a non-light producing body is not a planet)

Wow... another great list of ideas.

Thanks for this.

You're definitely welcome!

[Prometech]

From this Article: http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2009-09/what-does-star-sound

"A super nova would sound like 10 octillion two-megaton nuclear bombs exploding."

That totally needs to be added. Not.

[clockworks]

A star sound this will be a cool this in hearing the sounds of the stars:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ogyKgV4KN4&feature=player_embedded#!

implying stars actually make audible sound

[vh]

If you read the article, you'll see that the sound travels through the medium of gas resulting from a supernova.