friction in space ?

[Alexander Ferum]

I on my ship recently have hit the container, it has started spun, but to my surprise the rotation slowed.
In my opinion is too much - after all these things do not affect gameplay, why do it, in space is no friction ?

 

[GerminVermin]

So, what is your suggestion then? Just an objection to something but no suggestion on how to fix it or how it would add value to the game?

 

[Alexander Ferum]

my suggestion to remove friction, so it doesn't bother people

 

[withnail]

It's a fair comment, I have often thought this.

I'm not sure that there is a requirement to fix this, just an understanding of the mechanic.

 

[Radamanthe]

So, what is your suggestion then? Just an objection to something

Unrealistic behavior is enough to object.

but no suggestion on how to fix it

Simply let Newton laws do their job. Remove the code countering the container's linear and angular velocities. Containers shouldn't have pilot-assist-like behavior !

or how it would add value to the game?

Not only it adds to realism, but there is a gameplay implication. You need a precious container and you fail to scoop it correctly. Instead, you hit it, giving it velocity. If you desperatly need it, you'll have to align your linear velocity with it, making it harder and a bit more challenging for your second try (switching off ship's pilot assist may be an advantage here). I find this pretty good for gameplay -> be careful not to miss your first try.

In fact, strictly, a container should already move the first time it is found (ships debris too by the way) depending on how it was ejected in the first place. But I think we can accept it initially standing still, at least until something hit it somehow.

 

[GerminVermin]

I'm not sure that there is a requirement to fix this, just an understanding of the mechanic.

This is the proper answer to 95% of the gripe in this sub forum.

 

[Vahur Kahur]

I'm pretty sure it's for gameplay reasons. When you are picking up stuff and accidentally bump into it, you are punished for it by damage to the stuff and having to wait a little while it spins, then you can try again. If stuff just kept spinning it would be pretty impossible to pick it up after a small mistake.

Just rationalise it by thinking your ship's gravity has a stabilising effect.

 

[NatoNine]

Just rationalise it by thinking your ship's gravity has a stabilising effect.

Or what if individual containers had reaction control thrusters built in (of course that then begs the question of why shouldn't we use that to help guild them into the cargo scoop)... But ore wouldn't have a excuse for slowing down, but considering another chunk can always be cut and scooped instead maybe they shouldn't slow down for gameplay reasons.

 

[Tyfy]

But ore wouldn't have a excuse for slowing down, but considering another chunk can always be cut and scooped instead maybe they shouldn't slow down for gameplay reasons.

Would ore not be affected by the gravity of the rock it cam from thereby slowing it slightly.

 

[NatoNine]

Would ore not be affected by the gravity of the rock it cam from thereby slowing it slightly.

Actually asteroids and planetary ring rocks in ED are so small that in reality it would only take a velocity of a few cm/s to travel faster than their escape velocity. I see no problem with allowing ore chunks Newtonian motion, the game would just need to be balanced so more ore is cut when mining to account for losses (which would allow for more skilled players to collect on balance more ore through skilled piloting) .

 

[sutex]

There is no fiction in space...just gravity which affects your MASS & thus inertia A dense nebula could slows down your inertia over time. So if the dev's want a space sim with players flying then let the LAWS of physic do their job , Would be good to knock asteroids out in the direction of others lol need one massive ship or a lot of players working together ,... Bombard planets

 

[sutex]

There is no fiction in space...just gravity which affects your MASS & thus inertia A dense nebula could slows down your inertia over time. So if the dev want a space sim with players flying then let the LAWS of Physics do their job , Would be good to knock asteroids out in the direction of others lol need one massive ship or a lot of players working together , Bombard planets

 

[drowadin]

So you are stateing if i rub two objects together because they are in space they cause no friction???? I believe you sir are wrong...

My friends you truly need to get a few degrees before you speak of what you do not undstand!!!

Friction in Space, Does friction exist in space?

Yes when two surfaces rub togetherin outer space Friction is a surface effect and doesn't depend upon there being air. There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum.


Dr. Eric Christian


http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_sp_ms.html

What i beleive you are trying to to get across is estimation of speed not friction..

1. Speed in Space
   
   If speed equals distance multiplied by time, is there really such thing as "speed" in space? Time is a man-made unit of measure based on a terrestial observation, and so are units to measure distance! If speed exists, can one reach zero speed or acceleration in space and literally watch Earth fly by?The speed of an object is how much its position changes in a given amount of time. As long as we can measure a position and a time, we can define a speed, whether that object is on the Earth or far out in space. Distance and time do exist outside the Earth, in fact, they are a fundamental part of the "fabric" that makes up the Universe.
   Humans have personally studied the motion of objects (including themselves) in Earth orbit and on the Moon. Spacecraft have been to the surface of Mars, Venus, asteroids, comets, and have flown by all but one of the nine planets. The Voyager spacecraft are now outside the solar system and are still being tracked to monitor their positions and speed. With large arrays of telescopes we have detected planets orbiting other stars, the motion of other galaxies swirling around their cores, and clustering of galaxies together. In every case, right out to the very edge of what we can observe, distance, time, and speed seem to work everywhere in the Universe just the way they do here on Earth. The units we use to measure distance and time are made up (an inch could have been defined twice as long, for example) but the distance or time itself does not depend on us.
   So can we "reach zero speed"? The speed of an object is always measured "relative to" the speed of something else (hence the term "relativity"). For instance, if I sit at a railroad crossing and watch a train go by, I might measure the speed of the train as 50 miles per hour. On the other hand, if I'm in a car moving alongside the train at 45 miles per hour then the speed of the train will only appear to me to be 5 miles per hour. (When you get near the speed of light things start to behave a little differently but that's another story, Einstein's "special" relativity). The point is that we always measure speed with respect to some particular frame of reference.
   As it turns out, there doesn't seem to be any absolute frame of reference in the Universe. Earth moves around the Sun, the Sun moves through the arm of the Milky Way galaxy, the arm spirals around the core of the Galaxy, our galaxy moves inside our local group, and so on. A few theorists may argue that there is some frame of reference against which all motion can be measured, but even that should tell you that if such a frame exists, it is not obvious. So for our purposes, if you want to watch the Earth fly by, all you have to do is get yourself moving the other way at whatever speed you want to see the Earth go by.
   One thing you could imagine doing is to launch a spacecraft to orbit the Sun in the opposite direction that the Earth goes around. If you got the spacecraft going the other way at the same speed as the Earth, you would be "at rest" from the point of view of the solar system. Then you could sit there and watch the Earth go around the Sun and come back to you every year (you'd want to move over a little so it doesn't run into you when it comes around again). So that might be "zero speed" with respect to the Earth's motion around the Sun, but not compared to another planet's motion or the Sun's motion through the galaxy.
   Dr. Jeff George
   (April 2003)

1. Acceleration and Velocity in Space
   
   It's my understanding that if a space-going vessel continued to burn its engines non-stop, then regardless of the power of the engines (or the fuel used) the vessel would continue to accelerate until the fuel ran out. Then it would coast at a constant speed. A friend said that this is incorrect and that each fuel used in space has a maximum speed, and that once that speed is attained the vessel will be at a constant speed, even if the engines are on continuously. Which is true?The short answer is, "You're right and your friend is wrong."
   This question was answered by Newton when he concluded that acceleration (and not velocity) was proportional to the force applied to an object. Another of his laws was that once set in motion (such as when a spacecraft is coasting after burning its fuel), the object travels in a straight line at a constant speed unless acted upon by another force.
   Probably the greatest reason for misunderstanding this aspect of classical physics is the modern car. We know that to drive at a constant speed we need to burn fuel. What we forget is that a moving car experiences friction in the form of air resistance. The soft tires also consume energy as they flex and turn. The fuel burned in the engine is overcoming those forces to allow the car to move at a constant speed.
   Newton would have loved space. There is no air resistance. There is only gravity. Once a spacecraft is accelerated to a given speed, the engine is turned off and the craft coasts forever with its trajectory affected only by the force of gravity.
   The best example of this I know is the Voyager 1 & 2 spacecraft. They were launched in 1977 and went to Jupiter and Saturn. Voyager 2 went on to Uranus and Neptune. Their trajectories were affected by gravity during their swings past the planets, but they continue to coast ever outward. Today they are nearly 90 times as far from the Sun as is the Earth and probing the region where space dominated by our Sun meets interstellar space. And on they coast, not burning any fuel. They move at a constant velocity, looking, recording, and teaching us more every day.
   So you see, the beauty of space is that it is really much simpler than physics here on Earth.
   Dr. Charles Smith
   (June 2004)

1. Density of Matter in Space
   
   It seems to me that with space travel, the speed of a spacecraft would be limited by the matter in space due to friction. Is this true?The density of matter in our Galaxy is about 1 particle/cm³ (in the disk, with the halo being less dense). The density of matter in intergalactic space (between galaxies) is about 2 x 10^-31 gm/cm³, mainly hydrogen. At these densities, I don't think one has to worry about friction.
   Dr. Louis Barbier (KEEP IN MIND HE SAY'S I DONT THINK ONE HAS TO WORRY ABOUT FRICTION).

And nasa has been in space we have not hahah lol

And i beleive that will answer all of youre questions on speed, friction and time any more I can use google very well.

 

[Zueuk]

And which object a container is "rubbing" in the deep space when it stops moving shortly after you hit it?

I kind of understand that somebody may have thought that to let things float away easily would be too annoying for gameplay, but... the same people added tons of other extremely annoying gameplay limitations already that seriously decrease the amount of fun that we have from the game.

 

[drowadin]

the game should be fun that is great but made as real as possible I was just letting him know friction does exist in space. MERRY CHRISTMAS..

 

[Alexander Ferum]

the game should be fun that is great but made as real as possible I was just letting him know friction does exist in space. MERRY CHRISTMAS..

you too literally understood my words

 

[GerminVermin]

you too literally understood my words

Not understanding you apparently comes easy to several people. Sorry!

 

[IceSerpent]

I on my ship recently have hit the container, it has started spun, but to my surprise the rotation slowed.
In my opinion is too much - after all these things do not affect gameplay, why do it, in space is no friction ?

Try mining and you'll rapidly realize how "all these things do not affect gameplay" actually do affect gameplay.

 

[MrVibrating]

I on my ship recently have hit the container, it has started spun, but to my surprise the rotation slowed.
In my opinion is too much - after all these things do not affect gameplay, why do it, in space is no friction ?

Tsk, it's VERY simple, listen up: in Elite lore, Newton's laws prevailed until some time after 3250, when it was discovered that actshually, space isn't a vacuum at all, but some kind of non-Newtonian fluid, with velocity-dependent viscosity.

Hence kinetic energy is naturally lost to the VERY HIGH friction of "space", via perfectly ordinary dissipative losses.





And also, the moon is made of cheese*.



(*contains lactose. Prepared in a factory that also processes gluten products. May contain traces of horse)

 

[Kramster]

Can just hear the screams coming from the angry posts as people rage when chasing canisters/ore becomes like chasing balloons on a windy day...