Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: Random Objects are still very irrational  (Read 3992 times)

Gordon Freeman

  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Random Objects are still very irrational
« on: September 04, 2015, 12:21:47 AM »
I think this has been a problem since Alpha 7 or 8, but random bodies still have insane and unrealistic tilt values and really, really long rotational periods.

The same ideas are persistent with random gas giants, but gas giants also have the additional problem of being tiny-- 5 or 6 earth masses at most as far as I've seen...

Physics_Hacker

  • *****
  • Posts: 441
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2015, 01:08:15 AM »
I checked and the smallest gas giants are around 4 earth masses and the highest I've seen is about 6, rocky plamets go from 40 moons (uh which is still very very rare to get) up to 2.3 Earths, rocky planets should go up to about 5-6 earths, and gas giants should be from about 10 Earths to the Brown Dwarf limit of 13 jupiters, and the boundry for the Brown Dwarf -to- planet should be more smooth in temperature,  going from -273 C to somewhere in the 2000's C doesn't seem very realistic. ..

Gordon Freeman

  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2015, 01:21:00 AM »
5-6 earths is pretty huge for a rocky planet.. I think it should just be somewhere from a few tens of moon masses to maybe 3 or 4 earths.

There are some extrasolar gas giants that are about 5 or 6 earth masses. The current randomizer usually places gas giants at these masses and lower. While it's semi-realistic I think there should be much larger randomizations like 1 jupiter mass and upwards.

You're right. Larger gas giants undergo deuterium fusion, so they should be naturally hotter as they get closer to being brown dwarfs.


We should let the devs decide what's accurate though, since there has been a rocky planet recorded at 17 earths and such...

Cryo

  • *****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2015, 01:47:45 PM »
5-6 earths is pretty huge for a rocky planet.. I think it should just be somewhere from a few tens of moon masses to maybe 3 or 4 earths.

There are some extrasolar gas giants that are about 5 or 6 earth masses. The current randomizer usually places gas giants at these masses and lower. While it's semi-realistic I think there should be much larger randomizations like 1 jupiter mass and upwards.

You're right. Larger gas giants undergo deuterium fusion, so they should be naturally hotter as they get closer to being brown dwarfs.


We should let the devs decide what's accurate though, since there has been a rocky planet recorded at 17 earths and such...
there will be so many  things to rewrite when we reach the stars....planetary formation being on of them and how gas giants and terrestrial planets form

Gordon Freeman

  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2015, 12:21:23 AM »
That would be accretion disks and protostars, not individual randomized stars.

BlurryVortices

  • *****
  • Posts: 76
  • There's an "I" in the middle of "Hurricane"
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2015, 08:26:08 PM »
I think this has been a problem since Alpha 7 or 8, but random bodies still have insane and unrealistic tilt values and really, really long rotational periods.

The same ideas are persistent with random gas giants, but gas giants also have the additional problem of being tiny-- 5 or 6 earth masses at most as far as I've seen...
Also, Random Rocky Planets are sometimes spawned with having a backwards rotation.

BlurryVortices

  • *****
  • Posts: 76
  • There's an "I" in the middle of "Hurricane"
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2015, 08:30:28 PM »

Gordon Freeman

  • *****
  • Posts: 480
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2015, 08:55:35 AM »
Also, Random Rocky Planets are sometimes spawned with having a backwards rotation.

There's no such thing as "backwards" rotation, only Retrograde in relative to the orbit of the planet and/or the rotation of the star.

Read this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_giant

I think everyone here should know by heart what a gas giant is; why are you giving me this

Physics_Hacker

  • *****
  • Posts: 441
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2015, 06:56:17 PM »
Also, Random Rocky Planets are sometimes spawned with having a backwards rotation.

There's no such thing as "backwards" rotation, only Retrograde in relative to the orbit of the planet and/or the rotation of the star.

Read this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_giant

I think everyone here should know by heart what a gas giant is; why are you giving me this

I think the point of that was that what Universe Sanbox spawns right now are gas dwarves, no gas giants.

BlurryVortices

  • *****
  • Posts: 76
  • There's an "I" in the middle of "Hurricane"
Re: Random Objects are still very irrational
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2015, 03:52:36 AM »
Also, Random Rocky Planets are sometimes spawned with having a backwards rotation.

There's no such thing as "backwards" rotation, only Retrograde in relative to the orbit of the planet and/or the rotation of the star.

Read this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_giant

I think everyone here should know by heart what a gas giant is; why are you giving me this

I think the point of that was that what Universe Sanbox spawns right now are gas dwarves, no gas giants.
Exactly