GamingB3ast Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 Belts and rings! Will we have astroid belts? Maybe at the edge of the kerbol system? (Since we have to go out there soon) And the rings of planets, will the rocks and ice be collidable? With just 19 days left, the hype is real, and I am excited to find out what is in store for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashandalar Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 It was stated on the Discord server that rings won't be collidable to start with: https://discord.com/channels/1039959585949237268/1039965578754007060/1070409686265909381 I believe rings will only be present at Dres to begin with, so hopefully collisions will be working by the interstellar update, when there will be more interesting ringed bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 I'm with the guys who reacted with the skull. I didn't know that, and I ask why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truebadour Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 Yeah I'm a bit disappointed, visiting the new Dres rings was the first thing on my to-do list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vl3d Posted February 5, 2023 Share Posted February 5, 2023 2 hours ago, Ashandalar said: It was stated on the Discord server that rings won't be collidable to start with: https://discord.com/channels/1039959585949237268/1039965578754007060/1070409686265909381 I believe rings will only be present at Dres to begin with, so hopefully collisions will be working by the interstellar update, when there will be more interesting ringed bodies. I'm OK with that. I'm curious if we'll get radiation belts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minmus Taster Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Truthfully I don't see the big deal with no collisions on the rings. It's not like your gonna be trying to fly into them anyways and they'll still be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t_v Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 If you aren’t careful you will probably intersect with some of the more extreme rings by accident and collisions might matter. I’m actually pretty excited for that as you need to fit your orbit into specific altitudes and get specific timing, but I just hope it comes early in the roadmap. Maybe the collision on rings and collision with scatter on planets are running on the same not-yet-optimized software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 7 hours ago, Minmus Taster said: Truthfully I don't see the big deal with no collisions on the rings. It's not like your gonna be trying to fly into them anyways and they'll still be there. Yes I would. Absolutely yes I would. And then goes the whole thing of avoiding them because they're collideable, there's no point in avoiding if there's nothing to hit. A huge chunk of Dres navigation is just missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 1 minute ago, The Aziz said: Yes I would. Absolutely yes I would. And then goes the whole thing of avoiding them because they're collideable, there's no point in avoiding if there's nothing to hit. A huge chunk of Dres navigation is just missing. Not to mention after ring collisions appear some players will understandably be confused to see vessels disappearing from the map view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 18 hours ago, Ashandalar said: It was stated on the Discord server that rings won't be collidable to start with: https://discord.com/channels/1039959585949237268/1039965578754007060/1070409686265909381 I believe rings will only be present at Dres to begin with, so hopefully collisions will be working by the interstellar update, when there will be more interesting ringed bodies. The fact that Dress has rings but not the gas giants relly tickles me badly. Rigs form exactly because gas giants have more oblongated form due to their rotation combined with most of their mass being not rigidly locked. The oblongated shape is what concentrate everythign in close orbit aroudn a very very thin belt. Small rigid spherical bodies CANNOT form rings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 6 minutes ago, tstein said: Small rigid spherical bodies CANNOT form rings Small bodies can form rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K^2 Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 3 minutes ago, tstein said: Rigs form exactly because gas giants have more oblongated form due to their rotation combined with most of their mass being not rigidly locked. The oblongated shape is what concentrate everythign in close orbit aroudn a very very thin belt. Small rigid spherical bodies CANNOT form rings Anything with a gravitational field that is cylindrically, but not spherically symmetrical has the necessary conditions form rings. While a gas giant is almost guaranteed to have the right conditions, there are a number of ways a rocky body can gain that sort of symmetry as well. Consider Earth's own Moon that has a very "lumpy" gravitational field. A body formed under similar circumstance but with more angular momentum, not becoming tidally locked as quickly, could gain the required symmetry. If we imagine that Dress formed as one of the moons of Jool and was later ejected, it could be the right gravitational "shape" to host rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said: Small bodies can form rings. That is not simetrical... not round. It is exactly the non sphere shape (i.e non uniform gravity field) that put ascending and descending acceleration on the dust and when their multi orbits collide at middle get neutralzied at that point. That is the system that can transform a dust cloud into a ring pattern. Something with a large lump in one side is enough.. important part is the lump being radial tot he rotation axis. 29 minutes ago, K^2 said: Anything with a gravitational field that is cylindrically, but not spherically symmetrical has the necessary conditions form rings. While a gas giant is almost guaranteed to have the right conditions, there are a number of ways a rocky body can gain that sort of symmetry as well. Consider Earth's own Moon that has a very "lumpy" gravitational field. A body formed under similar circumstance but with more angular momentum, not becoming tidally locked as quickly, could gain the required symmetry. If we imagine that Dress formed as one of the moons of Jool and was later ejected, it could be the right gravitational "shape" to host rings. True the Luna's aberrational density (probably result of its formation as result of a collision) give it enough of what it needs, but dress all alone in middle of nowhere seems a bit more far fetched. Edited February 6, 2023 by tstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: That is not simetrical... not round. It is exactly the non sphere shape (i.e non uniform gravity field) that put ascending and descending acceleration on the dust and when their multi orbits collide at middle get neutralzied at that point. That is the system that can transform a dust cloud into a ring pattern. Something with a large lump in one side is enough.. important part is the lump being radial tot he rotation axis. So why can't Dres? Can you hand me the napkin maths you did to prove Dres can't have rings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, Bej Kerman said: So why can't Dres? Can you hand me the napkin maths you did to prove Dres can't have rings? It is very round.... that is the problem. Minimus would be more able to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: 1 minute ago, Bej Kerman said: So why can't Dres? Can you hand me the napkin maths you did to prove Dres can't have rings? It is very round.... that is the problem. Okay, so precisely how much more oblate does Dres need to be to have rings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: It is very round.... that is the problem. Minimus would be more able to do it. 6 minutes ago, tstein said: but dress all alone in middle of nowhere seems a bit more far fetched. Dresteroids. Dres is not that alone, it's the largest body in a cloud of tiny rocks. Also, the ridge on the equator suggests that the matter from the ring is slowly falling on the surface. The ring may be an effect of constantly capturing dust from the surroundings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, Bej Kerman said: Okay, so precisely how much more oblate does Dres need to be to have rings? It is proportional to the mass. The larger the mass the less oblong it needs to be. Small bodies, with small mass would need to be very oblong , while large bodies can be only slightly (That is why our gas planets all have at least a bit of rings). Small bodies also would have a hard time keeping all the debris/ dust in clsoe orbit since the collisions during its coalescing would send some of mterial away. It is not a matter or precise number.. it just looks and feels wrong and a feel wrong based on scientific reasoning. That sid IF they add some anomaly that we can discover to explain it then it would be a good way to save the suspension of disbelief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: It is proportional to the mass. The larger the mass the less oblong it needs to be. Small bodies, with small mass would need to be very oblong , while large bodies can be only slightly (That is why our gas planets all have at least a bit of rings). Small bodies also would have a hard time keeping all the debris/ dust in clsoe orbit since the collisions during its coalescing would send some of mterial away. It is not a matter or precise number.. it just looks and feels wrong and a feel wrong based on scientific reasoning. That's interesting, I still wanna see maths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, Bej Kerman said: That's interesting, I still wanna see maths. There is no predefined function. It is the type of thing you need to simulate a model and check if the conditions converge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aziz Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 1 minute ago, tstein said: it just looks and feels wrong and a feel wrong based on scientific reasoning Given they work with planetary scientist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: Just now, Bej Kerman said: That's interesting, I still wanna see maths. There is no predefined function. It is the type of thing you need to simulate a model and check if the conditions converge. No way to approximate it? I don't suppose you saying Dres can't have rings is merely a baseless assumption then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 6 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said: No way to approximate it? I don't suppose you saying Dres can't have rings is merely a baseless assumption then? I am saying it does not feel right dress to have a ring (and by that I mean this very thin wide rings style of saturn and jupiter.. if the rings end up being just a toroid shape than it is not far fetched) ) and jol not have anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bej Kerman Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, tstein said: I am saying it does not feel right dress to have a ring (and by that I mean this very thin wide rings style of saturn and jupiter.. if the rings end up being just a toroid shape than it is not far fetched) ) and jol not have anything. But is it impossible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tstein Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 8 minutes ago, The Aziz said: Given they work with planetary scientist... That did not stop them having planets with moons to close and too slow to be in stable orbit or unstable systems like kerbin, mun and minimus (and yes the system is unstable I did load the game data as precise as I could find in my N-Body simulation and minimus goes zip away ... Just now, Bej Kerman said: But is it impossible? If someone went there and POSITIONED manually each particle already in that orbit, it could stay in that orbit. So possible? yes.. but would need a very weird explanation in the abscence of a god Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts