kopernicus [1.3.1] Real Exoplanets v0.2.0 [12/12/18]

[ProtoJeb21]

13 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

This definitely seems like an interesting system to add into REX, but if you want to put it into your Exoplanet Explorers Pack, you can go right ahead.

By the way I'm very happy that I have a nice acronym for Real Exoplanets, unlike Extrasolar.

The problem with putting it in the EEPack is that I have no idea when I’ll ever get back to it or Kopernicus in general. The main reason: after KSP 1.4, there’s no longer x64 bit, making it almost impossible to run my collection of mods. I tried with GregroxMun’s SLIPPIST-1 system, and the game would just die whenever I entered the tracking station. If I can’t get access to x64 bit again, I will likely never be able to use and make Kopernicus planet packs.

[Andi K.]

1 hour ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

The main reason: after KSP 1.4, there’s no longer x64 bit

This doesn't make any sense to me. To my knowledge, x64 bit wasn't removed from KSP. I have 1.4.3 installed right now and I'm able to run it in x64 bit.

[ProtoJeb21]

47 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

This doesn't make any sense to me. To my knowledge, x64 bit wasn't removed from KSP. I have 1.4.3 installed right now and I'm able to run it in x64 bit.

Whenever I open up Steam and click the "Play" button for KSP, I get a little window for what specifically I want to launch. Usually it's "Play Kerbal Space Program" and "Launch KSP (64 btit)" but since 1.4 was released the latter is replaced by "Launch KSP (32 bit)". With it, I cannot run the game well with mods or my giant 8 km long superlaser I made with TweakScale and BD Armory (I was bored). I can't even run the game with the smaller 1.6 km version or even the 200 meter version.

[Gordon Dry]

@ProtoJeb21 my KSP 1.4.3 donwloaded by Steam is 64 bit only. Because Steam knows I got a 64 bit Windows.

Perhaps your Steam doesn't know that you got a 64 bit OS. Which OS btw?

Try to run Steam as Administrator on Windows.

[Andi K.]

29 minutes ago, ProtoJeb21 said:

Whenever I open up Steam and click the "Play" button for KSP, I get a little window for what specifically I want to launch. Usually it's "Play Kerbal Space Program" and "Launch KSP (64 btit)" but since 1.4 was released the latter is replaced by "Launch KSP (32 bit)". With it, I cannot run the game well with mods or my giant 8 km long superlaser I made with TweakScale and BD Armory (I was bored). I can't even run the game with the smaller 1.6 km version or even the 200 meter version.

If you go to the KSP folder, there should be an an exe titled something like "KSP x64.exe." Just launch it from there.

[ProtoJeb21]

21 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

If you go to the KSP folder, there should be an an exe titled something like "KSP x64.exe." Just launch it from there.

Thanks, I’ll try it out when I get the chance (which probably won’t be until Friday).

[Andi K.]

Modified Proxima Centauri b without water and a very thin atmosphere. The atmosphere has abiotic oxygen, but its surface is dry, irradiated and inhospitable

Edited July 6, 2018 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[The Minmus Derp]

Cool! Muns?

[Andi K.]

28 minutes ago, The Minmus Derp said:

Cool! Muns?

As I've said previously, no moons will be added into Real Exoplanets. The mod is called Real Exoplanets, and thus far, we have not discovered any moons outside of our own solar system. If I added exomoons into REX, I'd basically be forgoing the whole "real" aspect of this mod, which is basically the entire point REX.

[The Minmus Derp]

Can i make an Expansion pack?

[Andi K.]

1 minute ago, The Minmus Derp said:

Can i make an Expansion pack?

Go right ahead if you want. If it's of good enough quality, I'll promote it.

But if you do make an expansion pack, do not make it seem as if you are affiliated with me or something.

Edited June 27, 2018 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[Hypercosmic]

There we go, Proxima b looks more awesome now. Though, I expect a few large craters, but I guess those are eroded by the eternal storm caused by the temperature difference between day side and night side.

Oh, speaking about night side, I wonder if any atmosphere on this planet would freeze there...

[The Minmus Derp]

14 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Go right ahead if you want. If it's of good enough quality, I'll promote it.

But if you do make an expansion pack, do not make it seem as if you are affiliated with me or something.

1. Yay!

2. Of course.

[Andi K.]

On 6/28/2018 at 7:26 AM, Hypercosmic said:

There we go, Proxima b looks more awesome now. Though, I expect a few large craters, but I guess those are eroded by the eternal storm caused by the temperature difference between day side and night side.

Oh, speaking about night side, I wonder if any atmosphere on this planet would freeze there...

There are craters there, but they are eroded from the atmosphere and the water that used to exist on its surface. Proxima Centauri b is actually not tidally locked here. It is in a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, like Mercury.

 

On 6/28/2018 at 8:21 AM, The Minmus Derp said:

1. Yay!

2. Of course.

Come to think about it, I'd actually prefer you don't make an expansion for REX.

Edited June 29, 2018 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[The Minmus Derp]

5 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Come to think about it, I'd actually prefer you don't make an expansion for REX.

Aww.

[Hypercosmic]

21 hours ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

There are craters there, but they are eroded from the atmosphere and the water that used to exist on its surface. Proxima Centauri b is actually not tidally locked here. It is in a 2:3 spin-orbit resonance, like Mercury.

I heard that to get stuck in 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, your planet needs to be in a rather elliptical orbit, and that would probably cause quite a lot of tidal heating and thus geological activities. Volcanoes and dust-filled atmosphere would make some cool scenery, and seismic activity for good science without having to carry a bomb with you.

Still expect a few fresh new craters though.

[The Minmus Derp]

3 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

I heard that to get stuck in 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, your planet needs to be in a rather elliptical orbit, and that would probably cause quite a lot of tidal heating and thus geological activities. Volcanoes and dust-filled atmosphere would make some cool scenery, and seismic activity for good science without having to carry a bomb with you.

Still expect a few fresh new craters though.

I agree.

[Andi K.]

9 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

I heard that to get stuck in 3:2 spin-orbit resonance, your planet needs to be in a rather elliptical orbit, and that would probably cause quite a lot of tidal heating and thus geological activities. Volcanoes and dust-filled atmosphere would make some cool scenery, and seismic activity for good science without having to carry a bomb with you.

Still expect a few fresh new craters though.

I don't think that what your saying is entirely true. Yes, you need to be in an elliptical orbit in order to get that resonance, but that doesn't translate to more tidal heating. Look at Mercury. Does it have much geological activity from tidal heating? No. Another planet/moon would have to be pulling on Proxima Centauri b in order for it to experience tidal heating.

[The Minmus Derp]

7 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

I don't think that what your saying is entirely true. Yes, you need to be in an elliptical orbit in order to get that resonance, but that doesn't translate to more tidal heating. Look at Mercury. Does it have much geological activity from tidal heating? No. Another planet/moon would have to be pulling on Proxima Centauri b in order for it to experience tidal heating.

@Hypercosmic is right.

[Hypercosmic]

1 hour ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

I don't think that what your saying is entirely true. Yes, you need to be in an elliptical orbit in order to get that resonance, but that doesn't translate to more tidal heating. Look at Mercury. Does it have much geological activity from tidal heating? No. Another planet/moon would have to be pulling on Proxima Centauri b in order for it to experience tidal heating.

Mercury is actually pretty far from the Sun.  (Note: Mercury's semi-major axis is roughly 0.4 AU (e=0.2), while Proxima's is roughly 0.05 AU. Proxima is also larger than Mercury, which means more tidal effects)

Also, if my understandings are correct, you don't really need a third body to pull on Proxima Centauri b for it to experience tidal heating. The difference in tidal forces acting on it at periapsis and apoapsis, combined with the planet's rotation, might be enough.

What's Proxima b's eccentricity in your mod, by the way?

EDIT: That moment when you realized that The Minmus Derp is always there, just that you can't see it at first 

Edited June 29, 2018 by Hypercosmic

[Andi K.]

On ‎6‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 9:32 AM, Hypercosmic said:

Mercury is actually pretty far from the Sun.  (Note: Mercury's semi-major axis is roughly 0.4 AU (e=0.2), while Proxima's is roughly 0.05 AU. Proxima is also larger than Mercury, which means more tidal effects)

Also, if my understandings are correct, you don't really need a third body to pull on Proxima Centauri b for it to experience tidal heating. The difference in tidal forces acting on it at periapsis and apoapsis, combined with the planet's rotation, might be enough.

What's Proxima b's eccentricity in your mod, by the way?

Nevermind, I'm dumb. You're right in that you don't need a third body. However, when looking at Proxima b's small sma, you have to remember that Proxima itself is much smaller and much less massive than the Sun, so it is kind of hard to compare the two. I'm going to calculate the change in the gravitational force between periapsis and apoapsis for both Mercury and Proxima Centauri b to get an idea of the kind of tidal heating that is experience on Mercury compared to Proxima b.

Proxima b: 2.22e+24 N

Mercury: 1.16e+22 N

Basically, the change in the gravitational force for Proxima b is greater than that of Mercury. So, you're right. Proxima b would probably experience way more tidal forces that Mercury, despite Mercury orbiting a much more massive star. I'm not totally convinced that this would result in some sort of volcanic planet, though. Are there actual scientists that have written about how geologically active Proxima b would be?

EDIT: @Hypercosmic It would seem to me that, although Proxima b experiences great variation in the gravitational pull from Proxima, a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance would mitigate this to some level I think. The variation in the gravitational force would cause the planet to deform, causing the planet to heat up. However, a 3:2 s-o resonance is a more gravitationally stable configuration, and would lessen the amount Proxima b deforms. This would make tidal heating less extreme, and lower the amount of friction occurring inside the planet. I don't have any studies to back this up, that is just what I'm guessing.

Edited September 8, 2018 by AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures

[Hypercosmic]

1 hour ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

Nevermind, I'm dumb. You're right in that you don't need a third body. However, when looking at Proxima b's small sma, you have to remember that Proxima itself is much smaller and much less massive than the Sun, so it is kind of hard to compare the two. I'm going to calculate the change in the gravitational force between periapsis and apoapsis for both Mercury and Proxima Centauri b to get an idea of the kind of tidal heating that is experience on Mercury compared to Proxima b.

Proxima b: 2.22e+24 N

Mercury: 1.16e+22 N

Basically, the change in the gravitational force for Proxima b is greater than that of Mercury. So, you're right. Proxima b would probably experience way more tidal forces that Mercury, despite Mercury orbiting a much more massive star. I'm not totally convinced that this would result in some sort of volcanic planet, though. Are there actual scientists that have written about how geologically active Proxima b would be?

EDIT: @Hypercosmic It would seem to me that, although Proxima b experiences great variation in the gravitational pull from Proxima, a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance would mitigate this to some level I think. The variation in the gravitational force would cause the planet to deform, causing the planet to hear up. However, a 3:2 s-o resonance is a more gravitationally stable configuration, and would lessen the amount Proxima b deforms. This would make tidal heating less extreme, and lower the amount of friction occurring inside the planet. I don't have any studies to back this up, that is just what I'm guessing.

Don't know either

By the way, what's the tidal heating for Io if it's orbiting alone without the other moons?

[Andi K.]

Just now, Hypercosmic said:

Don't know either

By the way, what's the tidal heating for Io if it's orbiting alone without the other moons?

I'm assuming much lower. Most of Io's tidal heating is from its neighboring moons.

[Hypercosmic]

5 minutes ago, AndrewDrawsPrettyPictures said:

I'm assuming much lower. Most of Io's tidal heating is from its neighboring moons.

Interesting...

So, what do you expect Proxima b to have? Having lots of volcanoes, basalt plains, cracks, fissures and ravines, and an ash-filled thin atmosphere composed of CO₂ plus other common volcanic gases, maybe? Because a plain-looking planet won't do.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Hypercosmic

[Andi K.]

45 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

Interesting...

So, what do you expect Proxima b to have? Having lots of volcanoes, basalt plains, cracks, fissures and ravines, and an ash-filled thin atmosphere composed of CO₂ plus other common volcanic gases, maybe? Because a plain-looking planet won't do.

Well that's the thing, perhaps being in a spin-orbit resonance prevents such extreme geological activity to occur from tides.