Jump to content

Beduino

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    199

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Beduino

    [1.3.1] Launching KSP disables all win7 task scheduler tasks

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)

    Posted

    I have more than 1k hours of KSP in steam, but since the most recent version 1.3.1 was released launching KSP is causing a strange bug in windows 7 task scheduler, it's basically disabling all tasks indefinitely on the default library folder of task scheduler of Win7 as soon as KSP loading screen pops up and starts loading. This wasn't happening in KSP version 1.3.0.

    It's a strange problem that was affecting my windows past few days, turning off several programs that depends on tasks to start, like aida to monitor hardware sensors, and other utilities.

    It took me a few days, worrying about viruses or hacking, or what not, before narrowing it down to KSP both 32 or 64 bits causing the issue, without mods.

    I wonder if I'm the only person with this problem, or more people are affected and not realized it yet?

     

    The 2016 Martian Opposition - Mars, the Moon, Saturn, and More!

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    6 hours ago, Dartguy said:

    I viewed Mars last weekend and it was the first time I have ever seen any features.  Was a great surprise!

    Just saw Mars today with my 7 inch. I think it's my first time seeing the planet disk, even though i own this telescope for years, mainly orange but barely recognizable darker bands, its apparent size is slightly the same size as Saturn, which I observed next, with Titan next to it.

    Astronomers may have found giant alien 'megastructures' orbiting a star in the Milky Way

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    8 hours ago, magnemoe said:

    Interesting. Would we not discover the radial movement of the stars?  its another method to find planets, limited to larger ones but this is stars. 
    The two stars would also have different emissions, on the other hand it might be so simple its stupid :) You look for planets so you don't see stars

    Off topic would the outer planets in your system around the large star be stable?

    About the radial velocity, yes we can see the wobble for binary stars much easier than planets, because it's big wobble, the problem is that they only took measurements for a year after the RV was maximum near the possible periastron and concluded it was constant, but the catch is, the orbital period can be several decades, you will barely see any change in radial velocity in one year of data.

    I superimposed the data, to the theoretical radial velocity plot and it fits the data just as nice as their interpretation of constant velocity. See here. http://imgur.com/Eb6fCGR

    So it would be better to have at least 5 to 10 years of RV data to conclude anything.

    Regarding your last question, yes it's possible to have more planets and maybe some dwarf stars inside the hill spheres of both stars. This would alter the mass of the system, it could make the large star have a smaller semi major axis, hence smaller radial velocity.

    So yeah, it's a hard problem that could only be really solved with more data, bigger telescopes, better tech.

    The stability of habitable planets around Binary stars

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    2 hours ago, fredinno said:

    The Hill Sphere is misleading, since the SOIs can overlap.

    You are mixing up concepts there mate, SOI is for trajectory planning of spacecraft usually related with patched conics.

    The hill sphere is associate with the Roche Lobe, which is the region around a star in a binary system within which orbiting material is gravitationally bound to that star.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roche_lobe

    Even though both formulas look similar, they have different applications

    The stability of habitable planets around Binary stars

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Beduino

    14 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

    Of course, they can exist.An ultimate question: how long. Biological evolution needs a billion terranean years,

    You know that extinction level events happened on Earth, i'm not so sure our planet is so hospitable to life as we think, but again life itself seems pretty tough.

    Orbital encounters with other stars in the galaxy could disrupt the orbits of binaries much easier, but other than these, here's what wiki says about alpha centauri.

    Quote

    Early computer-generated models of planetary formation predicted the existence of terrestrial planets around both Alpha Centauri A and B,[94][97][98] but most recent numerical investigations have shown that the gravitational pull of the companion star renders the accretion of planets very difficult.[93][99] Despite these difficulties, given the similarities to the Sun in spectral types, star type, age and probable stability of the orbits, it has been suggested that this stellar system could hold one of the best possibilities for harbouring extraterrestrial life on a potential planet.[6][85][100][101]

    You know what.. you just gave me an idea.. i'm going to fire up spaceengine and land on some planet around alpha centauri, maybe drink some coffee in the process. :)

    The stability of habitable planets around Binary stars

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Beduino

    On 26/03/2016 at 7:32 PM, fredinno said:

    From Wikipedia:

    To be in the star's habitable zone, any suspected planet around Alpha Centauri A would have to be placed about 1.25 AU away [citation needed] – about halfway between the distances of Earth's orbit and Mars's orbit in the Solar System – so as to have similar planetary temperatures and conditions for liquid water to exist. For the slightly less luminous and cooler Alpha Centauri B, the habitable zone would lie closer at about 0.7 AU (100 million km), approximately the distance that Venus is from the Sun.[102][104]

     

    So yeah, there you have it. The habitable zones are inside the hill spheres of both stars where stable orbits could exist.

    Isn't KSP community amazing?

    The stability of habitable planets around Binary stars

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Beduino

    On 26/03/2016 at 11:05 AM, Spaceception said:

    So, I was screwing around in Universe Sandbox 2, after a couple of people were discussing the stability of habitable zones around planets around Alpha Centauri, so I placed down Alpha Centauri A/B, and separated them at a distance of 11.2 AU )I couldn't get the 11.2 by 35 something AU thing), and over the course of almost 2,000 years I stimulated Alpha Centauri Bb around both stars, around Alpha Cen B, the planet was flung out, but around Alpha Cen A, it was pretty stable, then I decided to put a planet 4 AU from both stars, Alpha Cen B had its planet slung out, but around Alpha Cen A, again, it was stable.

    Now, I would've simulated it longer, but I need to go somewhere soon, so I can't, anyway, about binary's in general, how stable would various binary systems be?

    Also, here's an example of a real life Tatoonie )The view would be much cooler as there's not only 2 stars, but there's also a gas giant in the sky!) :)

    First off, Universe sandbox 2 is fairly inaccurate over longer periods of time and I really wish it wasn't.

    I was creating my own simulation using another software recently and used alfa centauri as control for my model.

    The region of stability is defined by the hill sphere (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_sphere) around each star, you can calculate that yourself, but here is an image to help you view this.

    http://imgur.com/XgRdujC

    Yellow = orbit of Alpha centauri A

    Orange = orbit of Alpha centauri B

    Black = orbit of B as seen from the surface of A.

    Dotted region is the hill sphere of each star, distances are in AU.

     

    So there you have it both hill radius

    Hill A = 3.527 AU

    Hill B = 2.699 AU

    If you get the orbits right of course.

    :)

    Ow just noticed you are mixing two different concepts the habitable zone, the region where you can find liquid water on a planets surface, that green region of kepler 47.

    And the region of orbital stability (hill sphere) of a body where satellites could orbit without interference from another body.

    Astronomers may have found giant alien 'megastructures' orbiting a star in the Milky Way

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    39 minutes ago, YNM said:

    Maybe you should look up the difference in radial velocity due to their movement... For a star to be eclipsing binary, they'll have to be in a near-90 degree inclination, so have no worries in not getting any double-spectrum data. Then buy some telescope time, at sites equipped with michelson interferometer.

    Unless it's not going that way, or is beyond limit (too small radial velocity). I haven't checked.

    Actually you do have a problem with getting double spectrum if one star outshines the other which seems to be the case, one star is likely 4 times more luminous than the other, so you get a single line spectrum. This isn't measured with a interferometer but with a spectroscope, including the radial velocity.

    Regarding the radial velocity, they only measure it for a year, when it could takes decades to see say half of the periodicity, so there's still not enough data to rule out anything using radial velocity. I have not detailed it there, but the theoretical wobble in radial velocity of long period binaries fits the data just as well as their original interpretation of constant radial velocity.

    Telescope sensitivity vs size for planet characterising...

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted · Edited by Beduino

    3 hours ago, DBowman said:

    I haven't found anything that lays out the math relating size, focal length, light gathering and precision - does anyone have any info/good references?

     If you wanted to see 20 ppm variation for a single star how big/small a mirror would you need? if you wanted to see 0.1 ppm? if you wanted to do spectroscopy with 100 wavelength 'bins' then is that like another factor of 1/100 in ppm sensitivity needed? How much mirror would it take to do reasonable spectroscopic sample of an Earth like planet transiting in front of a sun like star? A lot of the things I've read seem to be shooting for the harder goal of imaging secondary transits and even non transiting planets.

    I think the keyword here is photometer, here's something that can give you a jump start.

    http://kepler.nasa.gov/science/ForScientists/papersAndDocumentation/SOCpapers/spie_2010_instrument_char_web_version.pdf

    Also, here look for photometer. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/press_kits/Kepler-presskit-2-19-smfile.pdf

    For the formulas, the best thing you can do is look for a book on photometry and telescopes, so you have concise ideas.

    Physic Lag increase in 1.0.4?

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, modded installs)

    Posted

    Not necessarily physics, but probably the heat calculation adds too much complexity per part.

    I mean, most parts are made of metal anyway which is quite good in heat conductivity. If heat was big enough to cause problems it would spread pretty quickly and gobble the whole ship, to me it would have been sufficient to have heat as part of the whole ship calculation, instead of having it calculated per part, except for the parts that generate or radiate heat anyway.

    That being said, I hate this version because lag has increased per part, not only in the launch but now i cannot build bigger bases or stations anymore, the performance is reduced a lot more compared to older versions.

    [1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted · Edited by Beduino

    I was testing the new version, it seems that there are still problems with 2 KW engines, more specifically the Saturn V second stage engine J2, seems to have wrong size and wrong nodes and also the Apollo CSM AJ10-137 seems to have the wrong nodes, the top node is far offset of the model.

    Edit: Also it seems that the Saturn V s-ii ullage motor never flames out.

    [1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted

    am i the only one who cant install this mod via ckan? It used to throw an error by selecting it, which i previously reported in ckan github, but now when i select it, the button go to changes is still disabled.

    Finally got it. If you have problems using ckan to install RO, the only possible solution is to uninstall all incompatible and conflicting mods before ticking RO.

    New Horizons

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    Also, check out these cool LORRI-MVIC (Ralph) color images of Pluto and Charon. Unluckily, those evenly-space, 300-wide equatorial dark patches are on the opposite hemisphere, the one that will set over the horizon 3 days prior to closest encounter and, from New Horizons' perspective, never come back.

    http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/nh-7-1-15_pluto_charon_color_hemispheres_annotated_jhuapl_nasa_swri.jpg

    That looks quite a bit like Duna and Ike.

    New Horizons

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    This has basically taken up the entirety of my life since it was launched in 2006, and I have been patiently waiting until now. 10 weeks seems like forever compared to all of those years... I can't wait for this! (It's a shame it was downgraded from being a huge project. At least we got something, right?)

    Do you mean that you work in New Horizons project? Please explain, downgraded from being a huge project?

    Seriously i'm interested, or at least my Engineer side and astronomer geek is. :)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Wow, thanks for posting this video, I loved it. It's cool to see how the instruments are programmed to be looking at different targets during the flyby.

    The only thing better is the real deal in couple of weeks and yeah probably better with music and easier to watch instead of running the nasa app :)

    Unity 5 [Is now available]

    in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion

    Posted

    "NavMesh data for non-carved regions takes ~2x less memory now.

    HeightMeshes bake faster, work faster at runtime, and use ~35% less memory."

    I believe that features mentioned above means that we will get significant RAM usage boost even if 64-bit won´t be a thing. However, if combined with 64-bit, it looks like virtually unlimited modability avaits us! (Okay, except mods conflicting between themselves)

    Right?

    NavMesh is used in AI, not used in KSP.

    HeightMeshes probably is unity stock terrain system, also not used in KSP.

    So yeah you got it wrong.

    - - - Updated - - -

    There are multiple Unity 5 games with working x64-win implementations now, so hopefully that bodes well for x64 KSP in the future (under Windows anyway).

    As for other advantages from migrating from Unity-4 to 5, we don't know, savings in one area might be countered by additional requirements in another (i.e. the physics area might become more efficient but the PBR/shaders in the graphics system might end up taking up more memory). Even if they (Unity Technologies) just fixed their DX9 CPU texture mirroring bug the savings would be significant.

    Going by Maxmaps tweets we can expect at least one more 1.0.x hotfix/patch so the game will be in a (by their own judgement) satisfactory state while they confront the possibly long haul task of migrating KSP over. Later on the Squadcast he said that Unity 5 tests are looking promising although they will have to remake the entire UI (without any elaboration), hopefully the now built in UI tools which were not previously available will make reimplementing this less of a chore.

    Hopefully we'll start getting news about this with this weeks DevNotes now that everyone is back home and on the case

    Dude i think they should totally ditch the old shaders (which were reported broken anyway in the last devnote) for the new unity PBR standard shader, it looks awesome and it's easier to use.

    A very special gift from Shapeways! (Ended)

    in 2015

    Posted

    What ever guys... i could go on with this but wont take us anywhere.. our language is a poor construct anyway. Sun set.. sun rise.. yeah planet spinning around.

    The oceans exist because there's enough water on earth, we sail on the round ocean around earth just like we sail around the fabric of space-time distorted around our planet because of its mass.

    Just because we are out of earths atmosphere doesn't mean we are not on earth.

    I was just thinking in joke mode, but Squad is super serious nowadays asking serious question for serious contests for a serious realistic simulation game.

×
×
  • Create New...