that travelling away from a star the background glow from the milky way increases (nice effect) but even when travelling away from neutron stars 
Has any one else noticed...
- Thread starter CMDR DoubleSkulls
- Start date
Yeah, the further you are from the nearest light source the better your long distance view is (thats why observatories are build far away from major cities with massive light pollution).
At least I think thats how it works...
At least I think thats how it works...
Think I heard that if we could build a telescope and place it on the Moon, we'd be able to see sooo much further than we are currently able.
Last edited:
Not sure if sarcasm or not.
Light pollution is a major effect for Astronomy currently
I did read a lot about Hubble and how it avoids earth atmosphere distortion effects and therefore gives much clearer views of space and distant objects so yes a Moon based observatory would be tons better than an Earth Telescope and would be able to get better pictures of things further away.
Im just not sure if that relates 1 to 1 with how the game works with proximity to light sources.
Last edited:
The effect is interesting but it's not light pollution (unless you are physically inside the corona). For any kind of light pollution or glare effect, you need to be in an atmosphere. But in the vacuum of space there is no material (gas) for the light to reflect off of, so space would be just as dark every where, as long as you weren't looking directly at the sun or the corona. This is partly why space telescopes are inherently better than terrestrial telescopes of the same size. They can image distant objects behind and just the side of the sun without much difficulty.
That being said, the glare off your canopy is quite realistic, as is the scattering of the light inside the glass obscuring any dimmer stars behind it. This would cause your iris to contract and let in less light the closer you were to the star.
The REAL mystery however is how we can be so close to the sun, yet not have our retinas burned out, and somehow still see all of the dimly lit stars around you. I choose to believe that the glass of the canopy is "intelligent" and blocks out the light selectively, only letting in a fraction of a single frequency where ever the star is currently located relative to the pilot. Kind of like those darkening glasses lenses but much faster and to an MUCH stronger degree, only allowing in .0001% of the light. The only problem with this is that we can somehow have our canopy blown open and still survive with our exposed bodies facing the sun. So our space suits must also have some kind of built in radiation protection.
That being said, the glare off your canopy is quite realistic, as is the scattering of the light inside the glass obscuring any dimmer stars behind it. This would cause your iris to contract and let in less light the closer you were to the star.
The REAL mystery however is how we can be so close to the sun, yet not have our retinas burned out, and somehow still see all of the dimly lit stars around you. I choose to believe that the glass of the canopy is "intelligent" and blocks out the light selectively, only letting in a fraction of a single frequency where ever the star is currently located relative to the pilot. Kind of like those darkening glasses lenses but much faster and to an MUCH stronger degree, only allowing in .0001% of the light. The only problem with this is that we can somehow have our canopy blown open and still survive with our exposed bodies facing the sun. So our space suits must also have some kind of built in radiation protection.
Last edited:
Not sure if sarcasm or not.
Light pollution is a major effect for Astronomy currently
I did read a lot about Hubble and how it avoids earth atmosphere distortion effects and therefore gives much clearer views of space and distant objects so yes a Moon based observatory would be tons better than an Earth Telescope and would be able to get better pictures of things further away.
Im just not sure if that relates 1 to 1 with how the game works with proximity to light sources.
Edit: A better link that lists everything I said in paragraph 3, a nice pic too.
I... meant telescope. No idea why my hands decided to type microscope. Derp!
I'm obviously no expert but it just came to mind with the whole being away from light sources to better perceive distant objects. Which reminds me. I live in a sucky area for any type of real stargazing. Middle of silicon valley, few places to escape the light pollution... My attempts at meteor shower viewing have thus far been failures.
Ok no worries
Yeah, im in the Uk which has maybe 3 decent sites at all.
Ziljan as always coming to the rescue at my lack of knowledge (+1), yeah I think this is where the games realism breaks down but I kinda like the effect. Having to fly away from the star to properly see the galaxy/nebulae makes it more interesting as an explorer...
Last edited:
that travelling away from a star the background glow from the milky way increases (nice effect) but even when travelling away from neutron stars
I took this to be the increased amount of photons you encounter as your speed increases - thus everything gets brighter
that travelling away from a star the background glow from the milky way increases (nice effect) but even when travelling away from neutron stars
Probably those same magic photons that Stellar Forge seems to think makes it OK to put terraformable water worlds around a neutron star. You know, the same ones that protect against the massive doses of deadly radiation?
This would cause a shift in the stars color, but I don't think it would affect the brightness. But now that you mention it, considering the extremely high speeds we can reach in super cruise, it would be awesome if color shifts were implemented in the game. I've never bothered to notice if its there or not, does anyone happen to know?
In general, the brightness of a star increases with its:
1) physical size (total volume, which is different from mass)
2) temperature (ie color, which related to the mass)
3) proximity
Traveling towards a star would increase the number of photons that hit, but not because of your speed, but because more of their increased density the closer you are to the star. It would also shift the photons to a more blue color, and would technically make the star seem a little brighter to you. Bluer means hotter, so it would look and feel hotter and therefore brighter to you than it actually was.
It's good that this blue shift isn't in the game, otherwise it would mean that we were experiencing time dilation when ever we entered super cruise, and our clocks and navigation would be too imprecise for interstellar travel.
1) physical size (total volume, which is different from mass)
2) temperature (ie color, which related to the mass)
3) proximity
Traveling towards a star would increase the number of photons that hit, but not because of your speed, but because more of their increased density the closer you are to the star. It would also shift the photons to a more blue color, and would technically make the star seem a little brighter to you. Bluer means hotter, so it would look and feel hotter and therefore brighter to you than it actually was.
It's good that this blue shift isn't in the game, otherwise it would mean that we were experiencing time dilation when ever we entered super cruise, and our clocks and navigation would be too imprecise for interstellar travel.
Last edited:
I don't think it would be too hard for a computer to compensate for time dilation if it already knows our relative speed, distance from massive bodies, and their mass. I just think it would be cool if we could see blue and red shift effects in game. Although canonically and for gameplay, it is nice not having to deal with the effects of time dilation.
I agree, I wouldn't worry about the reality of time dilation effects if stars were subject to the doppler effect. It would just be pretty cool. Regardless of whether the brightening effect is realistic, I really enjoy it as well. It just feels more familiar and interesting, and gives a sense that the distance that you are travelling has an impact on your existence. The way I imagine it, is that the there is a actually a large halo of gas and dust around the sun that has't really settled since the formation of that system, and that is what is reflecting the light of the star and blocking distant dimmer stars from showing. It is somewhat plausible because the effect seems to be more dramatic around some stars than others, and you seem to be able to leave the obscuring field quicker in some systems than in others.
Last edited:
Noticed that this week after spending so much time alone in deep space with nothing else to focus my attention on. Plus the subtle way the galactic background fades to black as you begin a system jump. Nice little details like that really make the game so engrossing sometimes!
The point I was trying to make is that the same effect occurs for the really dim neutron stars, just like for regular stars.
dayrth
Volunteer Moderator
You are in atmosphere, unless you lost your canopy. Not much, but would still scatter strong light.
Good point
Especially if it were on the far side. When it is in shadow it would suffer no light pollution from light reflected off Earth.
That is a very good point. Hopefully the base luminosity and temperature will be taken into effect. Neutron stars are in fact very dim because they are so small, even though they are so hot.
You need tons of compressed air or a really dusty cockpit to notice scattering. If you keep your ship really dirty, then yes you'll see some atmosphere-like scattering. However, if the air is clean, it needs to be several miles deep before it even becomes visible at the air surface densities you find on Earth. ED ships are notoriously dirty though, so it really could be as simple as space dust mucking up the cabin.
Did you see the movie "Sunshine"?
It might have been exaggerated for artistic effect, but gold-plated spacesuits didn't last long in direct sunlight. Which is kind of odd because the reflective plates of the ship's sunshield were also gold-plated and they weren't melting away.
Another thing is the filter of the observation lounge. Now that is how I envisage the canopy working.
Far side of the moon isn't in permanent darkness. It spends about 2 weeks in permanent daylight, then 2 weeks in permanent shadow... just like the side that we can see.