This might however require a mode where you would set up your system, turn on PPN, and wait a minute or two for the initial data to calculate before letting it run on with the corrective terms. It would also help enforce the speed of light as a limit in an more accurate way. There is however something called Post-Newtonian, and I would like to look into the computational cost it would take to more accurately show, for instance, precession of mercury or compact binary inspiral and spin interaction. A general relativity simulation of many bodies would not run on a consumer's desktop computer. If we arbitrarily apply a speed limit without accounting for accurate predictions for energy loss, than we lose more accuracy than we gain.įull general relativistic simulation requires the simulation of the spacetime itself (by decomposing it into a 4D grid of discrete points/regions usually) which is far more computationally intensive than treating the bodies as point particles of a certain singular mass and than checking for the attraction to all the other point particles as we do now. Universe Sandbox 2 is a newtonian gravity simulator. If I could reasonably add in post-newtonian terms to our n-body calculations that would also mean that orbits would lose energy according to the prediction of relativity and you would see inspirals of close binaries at more appropriate rates.ģ) Yes, we have also discussed having relativistically accelerating bodies radiating off energy. That would mean that if you delete a host star it would take time for the orbits of each planet to change depending on that planet's distance from the deleted host.Ģ) Yes, to a simulation setting that puts a cap on speeds. There are some relativity relevant fixes that we would like to possibly add in the future:ġ) It would be nice it gravity moves at light speed. Would you really want your view to disappear when you zoom out too fast? Anything you did in the game you would have to wait a delayed amount of time depending on your zoom distance to see take effect. There has been talk of a view setting to allow us to show red-shift and blue-shift, but showing events happening in observer time relative to camera position would be quite frustrating from a UI perspective. Yes, Universe Sandbox 2 would be a very different game if we treated the camera as a physical observer such as a telescope. But actually such an acceleration should not be possible to begin with. In case of an acceleration beyond the speed of light, the exceeding energy should heat up the body instead. This also should be an option rather than a general setting, but it should be there. On a similar topic I would like to see the maximum velocity of any object being capped at the speed of light, because that would change some simulations quite a bit. Maybe only for simulations with a locked camera position or the camera itself only moving as fast as light, but I think it could be rather interesting to watch. I was also wondering whether that could be implemented as an option. ![]() ![]() Since the camera can move at speeds far beyond that of light, how would the vision be distorted? Stretched and squeezed objects most likely. ![]() I realize that US2 would look quite different if the visuals would actually simulate lightspeed, but I was wondering how different it would look, in what way it would change. What I mean is: Normally it would take as much years as the distance in ly to the nova to see that flash. (btw, since that last update, nova clouds are flickering for me) Well, the flash was visible, the material cloud showed up only very much later when it was big enough. I noticed that the novae became visible instantly as the stars went kaboom, even if they were 50, 100 or thousands of ly away. I recently exploded a few stars around my planetary system just to see how it would look.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |