-
Greetings Commander, want a more instant approach to your questions and need for help? Check out the Galactic Academy Discord server!
Feel free to join the Galactic Academy Discord server by clicking here!
Newcomer / Intro Rings and star class
- Thread starter Badmiker
- Start date
@Sapyx might drop by with some info about star class and ring composition?
Formation of rings is still not completely understood as far as I am aware but there are proposed a few suspected methods:
arxiv.org
or of course:
en.wikipedia.org
Formation of rings is still not completely understood as far as I am aware but there are proposed a few suspected methods:
The Origin of Planetary Ring Systems
This chapter of the book Planetary Ring Systems addresses the origin of planetary rings, one of the least understood processes related to planet formation and evolution. Whereas rings seem ubiquitous around giant planets, their great diversity of mass, structure and composition is a challenge...
arxiv.org
or of course:
Ring system - Wikipedia
We don't know exactly how rings are generated by ED's Stellar Forge algorithms; it might go through the create moon > calculate Roche limits > destroy moons that are too close route, or it might simply accrete them out of the protoplanetary disc as part of the formation of the moon system around the planet. I strongly suspect that each discrete "ring" around a planet is actually a "moon", created but then destroyed to make the ring.
Ring type is very largely dependent on temperature. For Metallic rings, you're more likely to find them around planets orbiting the super-hot star classes (B and above). Likewise, if a planet has multiple rings, it is the innermost ones that are likeliest to be metallic.
As for ring formation, there seems to be a general "dustiness factor" for a star system, which affects the probability of ring generation; the more dust, the higher likelihood of rings. We've all seen those star systems where practically every planet and many of the moons have rings.
The star system's age also seems to play a factor, which makes sense; "new" star sytsems are going to still be full of gas, dust and debris to make rings from. Since big hot stars are always young, these two effects combine to make B and O class stars prime hunting grounds for metallic rings. Protostars (T Tauris and AeBe Herbigs) ought to be good for ring-hunting too, but are likelier to be the colder ring types rather than Metallic.
There also seems to be a high percentage of ring formation around "chaotic" planets in highly inclined or eccentric orbits. This is certainly true for moons, where unless the system is really "dusty", the only ringed moons are the outermost ones, the "captured rogues" orbiting at high inclinations to the rest of the satellite system. On the other hand, a stellar cataclysm (supernova explosion) seems to strip planets of their rings, as ringed worlds around neutron stars and black holes seem to be much scarcer than normal.
One final and very important factor in ring generation is the planet's gravity; high gravity planets are likelier to have rings, and are more likely to have more than one ring. As gas giants typically have very high gravity compared to dirtball planets, they have a high likelihood of generating rings. In my surveys, I don't keep stats on whether planets have rings or not, but just from "gut feeling" it seems gas giants have a greater than 50% chance of having rings. Earth-likes, on the other hand, only have about a 1.5% chance of having rings. This difference is entirely due to gravity.
Ring type is very largely dependent on temperature. For Metallic rings, you're more likely to find them around planets orbiting the super-hot star classes (B and above). Likewise, if a planet has multiple rings, it is the innermost ones that are likeliest to be metallic.
As for ring formation, there seems to be a general "dustiness factor" for a star system, which affects the probability of ring generation; the more dust, the higher likelihood of rings. We've all seen those star systems where practically every planet and many of the moons have rings.
The star system's age also seems to play a factor, which makes sense; "new" star sytsems are going to still be full of gas, dust and debris to make rings from. Since big hot stars are always young, these two effects combine to make B and O class stars prime hunting grounds for metallic rings. Protostars (T Tauris and AeBe Herbigs) ought to be good for ring-hunting too, but are likelier to be the colder ring types rather than Metallic.
There also seems to be a high percentage of ring formation around "chaotic" planets in highly inclined or eccentric orbits. This is certainly true for moons, where unless the system is really "dusty", the only ringed moons are the outermost ones, the "captured rogues" orbiting at high inclinations to the rest of the satellite system. On the other hand, a stellar cataclysm (supernova explosion) seems to strip planets of their rings, as ringed worlds around neutron stars and black holes seem to be much scarcer than normal.
One final and very important factor in ring generation is the planet's gravity; high gravity planets are likelier to have rings, and are more likely to have more than one ring. As gas giants typically have very high gravity compared to dirtball planets, they have a high likelihood of generating rings. In my surveys, I don't keep stats on whether planets have rings or not, but just from "gut feeling" it seems gas giants have a greater than 50% chance of having rings. Earth-likes, on the other hand, only have about a 1.5% chance of having rings. This difference is entirely due to gravity.
Last edited:
I'm out prospecting for icy rings in the hope of finding a triple LTD hotspot, best so fas has beena double vopal spot, so it would be good to know what stars are likely candidates.
Are there places where younger stars are more likely to be found? Am I right in imagining the galaxy as a big swirling pool of dust, where the dust eddies into thicker patches it starts to clump and, eventually, gravitationally collapse at a nuclear scale into stars? There's a level of chaotic fluid mechanics in how and where this happens but would you expect the stars at the centre of the ring, and in the middle of the disc, to be older?
If I'm right about star formation then nebula could be great candates; lots of dust, young stars, but they tend to be well visited.
Are there places where younger stars are more likely to be found? Am I right in imagining the galaxy as a big swirling pool of dust, where the dust eddies into thicker patches it starts to clump and, eventually, gravitationally collapse at a nuclear scale into stars? There's a level of chaotic fluid mechanics in how and where this happens but would you expect the stars at the centre of the ring, and in the middle of the disc, to be older?
If I'm right about star formation then nebula could be great candates; lots of dust, young stars, but they tend to be well visited.
No, that's actually backwards. Out there in the real galaxy, most stars are born in the thickest, dustiest parts of the galaxy: the disc. As stars age and they whirl about in their orbits having close encounters with other disc stars, they get tossed out of the disc.
In ED, this means that the stars in the middle of the disc are, on average, the youngest. This is also why we have the "neutron fields" way outside of the disc plane; the stars way Up/Down there are older, and thus more likely to have already exploded as supernovae.
Unfortunately, ED does not model the galaxy in that much detail, in terms of "this here's a star-forming nebula, let's fill the space around it with new, young stars". Real-world star-forming nebulae added to the game might have been given a bunch of real-world protostars around it, but procedurally-generated nebulae do not. I don't think a star's proximity to a nebula will give it more planets. It wouldn;t help that ED does not distinguish between star-forming nebulae (like Orion) and interstellar-debris-from-explosion nebulae (like the Crab Nebula); they're all given the same in-game nebula models.
It may work backwards, though: procedurally-generated nebulae are probably generated in sectors which the Stellar Forge calculates as being "dusty", and any stars generated in the same boxel are likely to be "dusty" too. But these calculations will cover the entire boxel, not just the region immediately around and inside the nebula.
As I understand it there has only been one LTD triple-hotspot found (Borann A2) but I would be happy to be corrected.
@Sapyx, thank you! It's becoming clear that players need at least a working understanding of astrophysics to play this game.
@Para; needle in a haystack, I know. I've found double hotspots for commodities on each trip so far and a few single LTD spots, all unexplored, all within reach of the bubble, so I'm hopeful. Blew apart a lovely LTD core found randomly in a Grandidierite 2HS yesterday.
I'm keeping track of star types vs rings & hotspots to see if there is any correlation. If you see me cruising past in a carrier, surrounded by pretty space nymphs, you'll know I've hit the motherlode.
@Para; needle in a haystack, I know. I've found double hotspots for commodities on each trip so far and a few single LTD spots, all unexplored, all within reach of the bubble, so I'm hopeful. Blew apart a lovely LTD core found randomly in a Grandidierite 2HS yesterday.
I'm keeping track of star types vs rings & hotspots to see if there is any correlation. If you see me cruising past in a carrier, surrounded by pretty space nymphs, you'll know I've hit the motherlode.
I wouldn't say you "needed it to play the game", as it's entirely possible to play the game and not even notice these kinds of details... but it is a game that tries very hard to mimic the actual universe - they hired an astrophysicist-programmer to help design the galaxy, for example - so someone with a knowledge of physics isn't going to be constantly trying to suspend disbelief a Newton, Einstein & Co get tossed out the window. It is why this game has a higher proportion than normal of amateur (and professional) astronomers playing it.
