...

[Andi K.]

8 minutes ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

@AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures BIG NEWS! BIG NEWS!

There are NINE NEW RED DWARF PLANETS! A total of five systems, with three extra known planets. Guess what system has a fourth planet? GJ 3293! Planet E orbits about every 13.25 days with 3.28 Earth masses. The other three planets now have slightly different but more precise orbital and physical parameters. Some screenshots in the spoiler if you want some creative juices.

  Hide contents

GJ 3293c

GJ 3293b

GJ 3293d (the moon is just for shows)

GJ 3293e

Link: http://imgur.com/gallery/R75eg

Here's the published research paper if you want to take a read: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05386.pdf

Wow, and in one of the solar systems I've already added as well. That's a nice coincidence. I will definitely look into these. I feel like astronomers are discovering new exoplanets every day!

[Hypercosmic]

Luyten's star contains two planet, one is a super-Earth/mini-Neptune in the habitable zone.

On 3/18/2017 at 8:13 PM, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

1. The tidal forces experienced GJ 667 Cc are not thousands of times stronger than Earth but more like hundreds of times stronger.

2. Just because the tidal forces are really strong doesn't mean the entire surface is going to be molten. Maybe this just means that GJ 667 Cc has much more volcanos compared to Earth, or that it has a much stronger magnetic field, or that earthquakes (exoquakes?) are more common place and more aggressive.

That being said, I'll probably add several volcanos that can be seen on the night side of GJ 667 Cc, to make the planet more interesting and more realistic.

Oops, sorry, the actual value is 300 times [citation: http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=32470, http://www.drewexmachina.com/2014/09/07/habitable-planet-reality-check-gj-667c/].

"While the existence of GJ 667Cc seems to be secure, unfortunately its potential habitability appears to have been overstated. Based on its S_eff value, GJ 667Cc seems to be safely inside the inner portions of this star’s HZ. However, since this planet was discovered using radial velocity measurements, we currently only know that its minimum mass is about 4.1 M_E based on the work by Robertson and Mahadevan. Given the currently unconstrained inclination of its orbit to our line of sight, there is only a one in three chance that this world has a mass less than the 6 M_E threshold dividing predominantly rocky worlds from mini-Neptunes. It is much more probable that GJ 667Cc is a mini-Neptune with little chance of being potentially habitable.

If GJ 667Cc beats the odds and is a rocky planet after all, it is still unlikely to be a promising habitable planet candidate. Investigation of the spin state of GJ 667Cc performed by Valeri Makarov and Ciprian Berghea (US Naval Observatory) strongly suggests that this world is experiencing excessive tidal heating due to the high eccentricity of its small orbit around its primary. Makarov and Berghea estimate that if GJ 667Cc has an Earth-like composition, tidal heating would generate about 300 times the heat flow as the Earth experiences melting its mantle and crust in the process. Given the two most likely possibilities, it seems highly improbable that GJ 667Cc is a potentially habitable world. For a more detailed discussion of this system, see Habitable Planet Reality Check: GJ 667C."

[Zang Jay]

Oh my god the RSSVE and RSSVE-Lite problems really drives me crazy.

It kills the sunflare.(or kill the whole atomsphere)

Also there are some other problems with scatterer and the way that the stock system renders the atomsphere.

But it's good to see that the merged system now works better(just a little bit) with time warp, I can finally colonize the real solar system with kerbals.

There's still many work, for example changing the description of the planets (I need to change all the "humans" into "kerbals" and change all the reference bodies.)

[Andi K.]

On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 2:02 AM, Hypercosmic said:

Luyten's star contains two planet, one is a super-Earth/mini-Neptune in the habitable zone.

Oops, sorry, the actual value is 300 times [citation: http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=32470, http://www.drewexmachina.com/2014/09/07/habitable-planet-reality-check-gj-667c/].

"While the existence of GJ 667Cc seems to be secure, unfortunately its potential habitability appears to have been overstated. Based on its S_eff value, GJ 667Cc seems to be safely inside the inner portions of this star’s HZ. However, since this planet was discovered using radial velocity measurements, we currently only know that its minimum mass is about 4.1 M_E based on the work by Robertson and Mahadevan. Given the currently unconstrained inclination of its orbit to our line of sight, there is only a one in three chance that this world has a mass less than the 6 M_E threshold dividing predominantly rocky worlds from mini-Neptunes. It is much more probable that GJ 667Cc is a mini-Neptune with little chance of being potentially habitable.

If GJ 667Cc beats the odds and is a rocky planet after all, it is still unlikely to be a promising habitable planet candidate. Investigation of the spin state of GJ 667Cc performed by Valeri Makarov and Ciprian Berghea (US Naval Observatory) strongly suggests that this world is experiencing excessive tidal heating due to the high eccentricity of its small orbit around its primary. Makarov and Berghea estimate that if GJ 667Cc has an Earth-like composition, tidal heating would generate about 300 times the heat flow as the Earth experiences melting its mantle and crust in the process. Given the two most likely possibilities, it seems highly improbable that GJ 667Cc is a potentially habitable world. For a more detailed discussion of this system, see Habitable Planet Reality Check: GJ 667C."

Well I guess I ought to use those nice textures I just created for a different planet

14 hours ago, Zang Jay said:

Oh my god the RSSVE and RSSVE-Lite problems really drives me crazy.

It kills the sunflare.(or kill the whole atomsphere)

Also there are some other problems with scatterer and the way that the stock system renders the atomsphere.

But it's good to see that the merged system now works better(just a little bit) with time warp, I can finally colonize the real solar system with kerbals.

There's still many work, for example changing the description of the planets (I need to change all the "humans" into "kerbals" and change all the reference bodies.)

Problems related to scatterer is probably because RSSVE planetList config overwrites all other planetList configs.

[Hypercosmic]

Just now, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Well I guess I ought to use those nice textures I just created for a different planet

Problems related to scatterer is probably because RSSVE planetList config overwrites all other planetList configs.

Drew Ex Machina articles are written by scientists, so it's realistic, even it seems pessimistic.

Also, trying out different possible scenario of habitable planets! That should be fun.

[Zang Jay]

Well the "wiggling planets by time warp" problems are still there, it was strange that seems only happens in the flight map view but not inside the tracking stations, so currently the solution was quick save and then go to the tracking station. It is actually interesting because even the icons and the gravity fields wiggles with time warp. I need to check carefully, it seems only effect the bodies which is in the same gravity system, for example if i am orbiting the sun, all the planets will wiggle with time warp, but if i managed to change orbit and orbit earth, only the moon will wiggle.

It's possibly because I didn't install the whole folder, because I am afraid that the original folder and plugins may hurt the stock system, so I will but the add-on and plugins in and have a test later.

What's more funny is that the merged earth seems friendly to all the kerbals, they could even connect to the ksc by using earth's own radars(it is actually because the earth have the nearly same config with kerbin, also the template)

[Hypercosmic]

There is an update to the Wolf 1061 system that push Wolf 1061d out of the habitability table (now some kind of ice giant in an eccentric orbit, disturbing Wolf 1061c's orbit) and turn Wolf 1061c (estimated lower mass is now 3.4 times Earth from previously 4.3 times Earth, but the actual value is very likely higher) into a volcano-ridden planet (W1061d is disturbing its orbit, changing its eccentricity over time).

For comparison, Gliese 667Cc's tidal heating power is 1.6X10¹⁶. This is 300x Earth. Wolf 1061c's tidal heating power at its maximum [computer simulated] eccentricity (0.11) would be on the order of ~2X10¹⁶ watts.

http://www.drewexmachina.com/2017/03/25/habitable-planet-reality-check-wolf-1061c-revisited/

[Andi K.]

5 hours ago, Hypercosmic said:

There is an update to the Wolf 1061 system that push Wolf 1061d out of the habitability table (now some kind of ice giant in an eccentric orbit, disturbing Wolf 1061c's orbit) and turn Wolf 1061c (estimated lower mass is now 3.4 times Earth from previously 4.3 times Earth, but the actual value is very likely higher) into a volcano-ridden planet (W1061d is disturbing its orbit, changing its eccentricity over time).

For comparison, Gliese 667Cc's tidal heating power is 1.6X10¹⁶. This is 300x Earth. Wolf 1061c's tidal heating power at its maximum [computer simulated] eccentricity (0.11) would be on the order of ~2X10¹⁶ watts.

http://www.drewexmachina.com/2017/03/25/habitable-planet-reality-check-wolf-1061c-revisited/

Thanks for letting me know! I guess I ought to change Wolf 1061 c to a lava planet or a planet similar to Io then? I won't have to change Wolf 1061 d though in terms of texturing, as I already have it as an extremely cold planet. I was thinking that the texture I created for Gliese 667Cc could be used for Kepler-62e or Kepler-452b. Which system do you think would be best to add, Kepler-62 or Kepler-452?

EDIT: Never-mind, I think I'll do Kepler-452.

Edited March 25, 2017 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[ProtoJeb21]

@AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures and @Hypercosmic I have my own take on the habitability of GJ 667Cc.

Depending on whether or not planets e through g exist, planet c could have a lower orbital eccentricity of around 0.02. This would lead to a synchronous rotation period of about 28.14 days, yet would not impede habitability. The real factor is composition.

From what the article states, it seems that 667Cc could be a water/gas-rich planet just based on mass. However, stellar metallicity is not taken into account. The orange dwarf pair 667AB have a metallicity of -0.59, compared to that of the Sun at 0.00. This is likely to be the same with 667C since they all formed together. Such a low metal content lowers the chances of rocky planets being present in the system. 667Cc is likely to have formed with a lot of water. However, stellar activity, tidal heating, or both will likely have evaporated any surface water, forming a thick H2O atmosphere. Some of that atmosphere will be lost into space over the eons, but enough could remain to lead to a Super-Saiyan-Venus greenhouse effect. So, what could 667Cc look like? It's probably one of these:

-A Sullust-like planet of rampant volcanism with some tiny pockets of water, likely underground.

-An ocean planet smothered in a gas dwarf-like atmosphere of H2O, CH4, and H2. An atmosphere like that would probably appear indigo or purple.

-A Venus from Hell, with a horrendous greenhouse effect and volcanism that makes the Siberian Trapz eruption from 250 mya look like a sparkler. Front side temperatures could reach 2,000*F.

[ProtoJeb21]

@AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures If it helps, I decided to figure out which GJ 667C planets are most likely to exist. With the stellar magnetic cycle of 105 days taken in mind, I decided to multiply that value by x/20. Any denominator greater than 20 would make things less accurate. If a planets orbital period matched up with a result of 105 * x/20, then the planet is likely not to exist. The results:

-Planets b and c are safe!

-Planets d and e overlap with two calculated values, therefore disproving them both.

-Planet f falls between 105x7/20 and 105x8/20, meaning that after the first two planets this one is the most likely to exist.

-Planet g falls only about 1.25 days away from 105x49/20. With the orbit period error bars larger than those of all the other planets, I can't really draw a definite conclusion at this point. Its large orbital radius doesn't help either, making all measurements rather fuzzy.

-Planet h is a weak signal and falls close to 105x3/20, so it probably doesn't exist. Plus an Earth-mass planet in a 16.9-day orbit would destabilize the whole system.

 

So for your Gliese 667C update of Constellations, I recommend implementing planets b, c, f, and (possibly) g.

Edited March 25, 2017 by ProtoJeb21

[Andi K.]

10 minutes ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

@AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures If it helps, I decided to figure out which GJ 667C planets are most likely to exist. With the stellar magnetic cycle of 105 days taken in mind, I decided to multiply that value by x/20. Any denominator greater than 20 would make things less accurate. If a planets orbital period matched up with a result of 105 * x/20, then the planet is likely not to exist. The results:

-Planets b and c are safe!

-Planets d and e overlap with two calculated values, therefore disproving them both.

-Planet f falls between 105x7/20 and 105x8/20, meaning that after the first two planets this one is the most likely to exist.

-Planet g falls only about 1.25 days away from 105x49/20. With the orbit period error bars larger than those of all the other planets, I can't really draw a definite conclusion at this point. Its large orbital radius doesn't help either, making all measurements rather fuzzy.

-Planet h is a weak signal and falls close to 105x3/20, so it probably doesn't exist. Plus an Earth-mass planet in a 16.9-day orbit would destabilize the whole system.

 

So for your Gliese 667C update of Constellations, I recommend implementing planets b, c, f, and (possibly) g.

Aren't f and g unconfirmed? I only want to have confirmed exoplanets in Constellations. Plus, I am having some real trouble with SigmaBinary and trinary star systems.

[ProtoJeb21]

14 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Aren't f and g unconfirmed? I only want to have confirmed exoplanets in Constellations. Plus, I am having some real trouble with SigmaBinary and trinary star systems.

Yeah, they are, but they're the next most likely to exist. Plus two-planets in a once claimed 7-planet system may not be worth the hype. Four planets is a pretty decent sized system.

[Andi K.]

50 minutes ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

Yeah, they are, but they're the next most likely to exist. Plus two-planets in a once claimed 7-planet system may not be worth the hype. Four planets is a pretty decent sized system.

But still, SigmaBinary is giving me problems.

After I get version 2.0 out (which will add the TRAPPIST-1/Kerbol System and Kepler-452) I'm going to take a break from modding for a little while. I'll still be relatively active on the forums, but I just want to play KSP for once where I am just playing for fun and not developing a mod.

EDIT: In fact, I might even create a lets play of KSP and make a thread for it here. Who knows!

Edited March 26, 2017 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[ProtoJeb21]

20 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

But still, SigmaBinary is giving me problems.

After I get version 2.0 out (which will add the TRAPPIST-1/Kerbol System and Kepler-452) I'm going to take a break from modding for a little while. I'll still be relatively active on the forums, but I just want to play KSP for once where I am just playing for fun and not developing a mod.

EDIT: In fact, I might even create a lets play of KSP and make a thread for it here. Who knows!

Sigma Binary has been quite uncooperative with me as well, and I don't think even @Sigma88 knows entirely why. Let's hope it hasn't somehow gained sentience and is trying to use its powers to annoy the puny humans 

I do that as well - go on a modding streak and give it a break to slingshot Kerbals at ~154 times the speed of light. Good luck with the Lets Play if you get around to it.

Also, just for some creative juices, I'm going to assess the habitability of GJ 667Cf and Cg:

• Planet G: Just a desolate, freezing ice giant. That's it.
• Planet F: Things are interesting for this world. With a mass of at least 2.7 Me, 56% the stellar flux as Earth, and an ESI of 0.77, it is open to a wide variety of planetary outcomes. Its low mass makes it less likely to be above the 6 Me limit where terrestrial worlds begin to accumulate significant H/He atmospheres, even with the low metal content of the host star. However, if around the 2.7 Me lower limit, Cf will be mostly covered in water. Half the planet will be covered in a huge ice sheet, while land would only poke out on the hottest point of the planet. Tidal heating is not a problem because it has a much lower orbital eccentricity than Cc. Atmosphere is the next key thing in assessing habitability. With a bulk of the planet likely rich in H2O, the atmosphere would probably also contain lots of water, which is a greenhouse gas. The planet's moderate stellar flux and equilibrium temperature of 221*K makes it so that a runaway greenhouse is less likely. In fact, as stated in some of the articles linked in previous posts, the accumulation of clouds on the front side would reflect the sunlight from the parent star back into space, also keeping the climate in check. So, in conclusion, it seems to be that Cf would most likely turn out as a slightly chilly, tidally locked ocean world. Desert islands around the hottest point of the front side would transition to a giant ocean, which would then itself transition to an ice sheet wrapping around the back side. Any plant life would have to be a deep blue or black in order to survive on photosynthesis. Meanwhile, the atmosphere would be mostly cloudy with large amounts of water vapor, along with trace amounts of hydrogen, oxygen, ozone, and hydrocarbons.

[Matuchkin]

On 16/03/2016 at 6:58 PM, Matuchkin said:

You know what we need?

Narnia.

Seriously, who the hell wouldn't want to plant a flag on Narnia?

Edited March 26, 2017 by Matuchkin

[Scotskerb]

Can you add the Trappist-1 system?

[Andi K.]

1 hour ago, Scotskerb said:

Can you add the Trappist-1 system?

As I have hinted at before a couple pages ago, the TRAPPIST-1 system will be added. As a little Easter egg, all of the planets will be the planets from the Kerbol system, and named accordingly.

[Scotskerb]

On 3/26/2017 at 5:54 PM, Matuchkin said:

Seriously, who the hell wouldn't want to plant a flag on Narnia?

The thing is, Narnia is a flat world, and I'm pretty sure KSP isn't particularly flat-world-friendly.

[Matuchkin]

1 hour ago, Scotskerb said:

The thing is, Narnia is a flat world, and I'm pretty sure KSP isn't particularly flat-world-friendly.

Ever watched Vsauce?

Look at the animation at 0:33. I would love to have a weird planet mod like that.

[Andi K.]

A flat Earth mod seems interesting but very difficult.

[Matuchkin]

10 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

A flat Earth mod seems interesting but very difficult.

Wouldn't it just be a matter of modelling? The gravity would sort itself out, considering KSP's model.

[Andi K.]

10 hours ago, Matuchkin said:

Wouldn't it just be a matter of modelling? The gravity would sort itself out, considering KSP's model.

But EVE clouds would look weird, as well as scatterer and the stock atmosphere effects.

[Matuchkin]

14 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

But EVE clouds would look weird, as well as scatterer and the stock atmosphere effects.

Ahh... make it an atmosphereless moon?

As far as I remember, there was once a 0.90 mod that had a cuboid planet in it.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Matuchkin

[Hypercosmic]

Drew Ex Machina's Habitable Planet Reality Check: Update on Kepler’s K2-72

From now, i decided to took the job of sharing exoplanet analysis news.

[Andi K.]

1 hour ago, Matuchkin said:

Ahh... make it an atmosphereless moon?

As far as I remember, there was once a 0.90 mod that had a cuboid planet in it.

Well then it's not really a flat "Earth" if it's an atmosphereless moon, right?

Yeah I know its possible to make a disk-shaped planet in KSP, its just a matter of the mechanics in such a set up. Also, with the way KSP works it would possible to go underneath the flat Earth and stand on it, which I don't think is how it's supposed to work.

7 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

Drew Ex Machina's Habitable Planet Reality Check: Update on Kepler’s K2-72

From now, i decided to took the job of sharing exoplanet analysis news.

Thanks! That would be really helpful.

Edited March 29, 2017 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures