I-Novae: Engine Screenshot Thread!

SW:TPM or SW:ANH?

Because the “war” starts in neither.

The war starts in Ep2 (AOTC)

OK. Battlescape needs a canyon. And a space worm.

Neither Phantom Menace nor Attack of the Clones exist. I don’t even know where I came up with those names. Just spewing nonsense, really.

3 Likes

I don’t know where you get your information from but wikipedia says this:

they are composed of 99.9 percent pure water ice with a smattering of impurities that may include tholins or silicates.[14] The main rings are primarily composed of particles ranging in size from 1 centimetre to 10 meters.

some place more reliable than wikipedia.

Do note that that says nothing about the actual distribution of particle sizes, nor the global nor regional densities of particles of different sizes.

That only gives an approximate range of sizes.

Here’s a repeat of a post I made in Rings aren’t flat

Saturn ring particle sizes

Color is used to represent information about ring particle sizes based on the measured effects of the three radio signals. Shades of red indicate regions where there is a lack of particles less than 5 centimeters (about 2 inches) in diameter. Green and blue shades indicate regions where there are particles of sizes smaller than 5 centimeters (2 inches) and 1 centimeter (less than one third of an inch), respectively.

In other words, red has stuff larger than 5 centimeters, green has stuff smaller than 5 centimeters and blue has stuff smaller than 1 centimeter.

Ring Particle Composition and Size

The primary composition of the rings is water ice; it is quite pure and predominantly crystalline, to the sensitivity level of the measurements

That paper has a bucketload of detailed technical information about the rings. Of particular interest is table 15.1, which spells out particle sizes per ring. The largest objects across the rings seem to have about a 5 meter radius. If I understood the bits I read correctly, figure 15.5 shows how the vast majority of particles are small. As you increase particle radius by 10^1, you decrease the particle population by 10^4. It seems that the great bulk of the mass of the rings is in small particles (as you increase particle radius by 10^1, you increase volume by 10^3).

1 Like

If you imagine the first film with them actually making an effort, and the second film without Hayden Cristensen’s acting, then they’re not too bad.

Yeah, that’s the paper I’ve been working from. Note that that power law (not exponential, as I incorrectly said above) decrease in densities is region specific, with some regions having a relative over abundance of larger particles. This means the global densities actually over-estimate how many large particles you’d find in other regions.

please share!

very informative post! Also noteworthy in the article:

Note the gradual increase in shades of green towards the outer edge of
ring A. It indicates gradual increase in the abundance of 5-centimeter
(2-inch) and smaller particles. Note also the blue shades in the
vicinity of the Keeler gap (the narrow dark band near the edge of ring
A). They indicate increased abundance of even smaller particles of
diameter less than a centimeter. Frequent collisions between large ring
particles in this dynamically active region likely fragment the larger
particles into more numerous smaller ones.

If I read the article and the technical paper correctely, I think it says that the particle sizes in the specific rings regions have upper und lower size limits, and between those two limits, the particle sizes vary somewhat uniformly.

First reaction: No! No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, NO!

Second reaction: Wait, define “uniformly”. We may be using that word differently.

The article talks about increased abundances of particles of a particular size, it doesn’t say its made all the same size.
The paper also talks about uppper und lower size limits. This suggests logically an inbetween range of sizes.

And then it also says:

Frequent collisions between large ring
particles in this dynamically active region likely fragment the larger
particles into more numerous smaller ones.

[quote=“TARS, post:203, topic:582”]
The article talks about increased abundances of particles of a particular size, it doesn’t say its made all the same size.[/quote]

Nor should it be taken that anyone else is saying that each ring segment is made up of particles of all of the same size. There is a smooth distribution of sizes in each region. That distribution isn’t uniform (the same number of particles of all sizes in the stated range). I don’t know what you mean by “the particle sizes vary somewhat uniformly”, though. That’s a technically true statement, but it can be applied to a huge number of very differently looking size distributions.

This was part of the post I was originally replying to:

their really isn’t any transition in size between rocks. their are transitions between each ring

So, understand what a power law distribution implies: The number of particles of radius r varies as r-q, where our best estimates of q based on measurements from Cassini, Voyager, and from ground-based asteroid occultion observations vary between 2.75 and 3.5 over the spawn of Saturn’s rings.

This is what that distribution looks like:

The blue line is q = 3.5, while the green line is q = 2.75. This is plotted in steps of 1 mm. Note that these values aren’t normalized to the absolute number of particles. Instead, they’re normalized to a radius of 1.0 m. The lines tell you how many particles there are with a radius of r m for every rock with a radius of 1.0 m. As we don’t know how many rocks there are with a radius of 1.0 m, it’s just the relative values that are important.

What this chart is telling us is that, depending on where you are in the rings, for every single basketball sized particle there are between 140 and 530 softball sized particles.

For every single beach ball sized particle, there are between 200 and 900 softball sized particles, but only between 1.5 and 1.7 basketball sized particles.

For every single desk-sized chunk of rock, there are between 600 and 3200 softball sized chunks, but only between 3 and 4 beach ball sized ones.

And for every Smart car sized ‘asteroid’ you’d find, you’ll have to fly past between 4400 and 42,000 softball sized particles, or between 20 and 50 beach ball sized rocks, or between 8 and 13 desk sized boulders.

There are house sized rocks in those rings, yes, but for every single one of them, there will be hundreds of car sized boulders, and millions of snowballs.

Kimmo posted an image of the Bomber next to one of the in ring “roids” a while back. It should help give an indication of scale. Density is another discussion, (as you’re already engaged in) but as you can see the planetary rings as portrayed in the rings video aren’t very densely packed, but they aren’t small either.

For reference, the bomber is roughly 10m in length. (I also don’t think that’s the largest “ring debris” that can be seen.

https://twitter.com/inovae_kimmo/status/532369901013708800

3 Likes

This screenshot is one of the most beautiful I’ve seen (because it gives a lot of informations :)).

The planet seems to not be perfectly spherical. Is this a realistic result of gravity effect or just a visual effect ?

Oh man, how did I miss that picture until now?!?

I think knowing the size of those rocks in the rings video relative to an average ship would have made it much more impactful, because that screen shot makes a hell of an impact. But c’est la vie.

So, we’re looking at a radius of about 15 metres for that ring rock there. And there seem to be plenty more at similar scales. Assuming the power law distributions discussed above (because why not?), we should expect to find between 20 and 45 ring rocks the same size of that ship for every single one the size it’s flying over, and between 300,000 and 10 million basketball sized bits.

Obviously, the smaller end of the scale isn’t going to match up to current models, but when paired with the ring video the distribution seems both accurate to within reason, while still leaning more toward favouring game scale variety.

In other words… SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

1 Like

That would most likely be due to the FOV camera setting used in engine.
A variable that is easily changed.

HOW did i not see that??? that’s a beautiful screen, worthy of desktop status. And it’s a rare thing to see ships in with the environments… you should release more screens like this! Just to feed my curiosity, how many properly textured, finished ships do you currently have in engine?